Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Woody]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

🇺🇦: The Russians have surrounded us? The poor bastards

[Middle-aged Europe]

German government asked Swiss government for authorization to export Swiss ammunition to Ukraine. Swiss government declined the request with reference to Swiss neutrality. Background is that the Marder infrantry fighting vehicle, which the Ukrainians want, uses Swiss-produced ammunition.

Reuters article on it: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/swiss-veto-german-request-re-export-ammunition-ukraine-paper-2022-04-24/

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

🇺🇦: The Russians have surrounded us? The poor bastards

To expand on this joke there is nothing on the ground to indicate that Russia could successfully pull that move off. They are moving slow, suffering causalities at unsustainable rates, and not to mention Sloviansk itself is going to be long drawn out Stalingrad style urban fight that will take forever for Russia to take. All the while they stretch out their supply lines and open their rear flanks to counter attacks from a Ukrainian army that is obtaining arms from the West everyday and is about to have fresh troops off of their mass mobilization coming in

[It’s so Joever]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

The capture of Sloviansk may not be so easy yknow. It’s a sizeable city unlike most of Russia’s gains. And are there even that many Ukrainian troops north of Lyman to the point they couldn’t fall back quickly, genuine question?

[Red Velvet]

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-says-gas-payments-may-be-possible-under-russian-roubles-proposal-without-2022-04-22/

"EU sees way to pay for Russian gas without breaching sanctions"

It seems EU ok's Russia compromise of EU companies paying USD or EUR for Russian gas and Gazprombank immediately converting it to RUB.  This entire affair is a battle of technicalities.  In the end, the fact remains that Russia will continue to export gas and get paid for it while giving Putin some face-saving "victory".  In the meantime RUb surges to 76 which is early Jan 2022 levels.

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

And people who called out the European hypocrisy (from both sides, from the ones asking them to do more to help and the people against the sanctions on Russia) were criticized for pointing the elephant on the room.

The economy vs national security debate is the key to understand the start of this new global order. Easy to push for intense structural de-globalization in rhetoric only but not really do it when you know you’re among the places which most rely on the economic benefits of said globalization and would be among the more affected places if a reversal trend were to start.

That explains the positions of places like Germany who want the war to end for a quick return for business as usual logic, one friendly to their wallets. That’s not going to happen and they will eventually have to be honest about what they care more about: Globalization or Ukraine.

Do you have anything to contribute to this thread beyond preening concern-trolling about muh European hypocrisy and argumentum ad populum fallacies to justify your country's disgusting "neutral" stance toward Russia's genocide? This is getting pathetic.

Have you anything to contribute to this thread beyond hectoring people for not having an opinion in line with your own?

Brazil, and Brazilians, have sovereignty, and clearly prize that. And there are concerns that are at play from a Brazilian POV, that should not be completely shoffed at.

And it's also true that what's being done re: sanctions are in fact deglobalizing the world. They make sense as a short-term tool to weaken Russia's hand, but they come at a terrible strategic cost in the long term if they continue indefinitely. If Russia gets used to sanctions (to some extent, they already are), then our bargaining chips will only diminish and our leverage over them will only weaken.

SWIFT, like many other things, can be regarded as an international institution on which we all rely; cutting Russia from it is not without downsides, as it only encourages the creation of autarkic spheres that rely on themselves, not on international institutions that we, in fact, have the strongest influence over. We could be harming the very international world order we are trying to save. It might be an impossible choice to avoid, but it's still a choice we are making.

And history tells us that the integration of economies, as we see in the modern age, does tend to result in higher standards of living on average. These higher standards of living, in fact, are important if we want a Europe that can afford to flex its muscles. More tax dollars from commerce means more money that can be spent on defense, in fact, implicitly, more money that can be spent defending against Russia should worse come to worse.

This war is about more than just Ukraine, and his conclusion is far from wrong in the gist of it. The de-globalization that is being promoted, indirectly, is not going to just harm Russia, it will hurt Europe too. Severing Russia from Europe in the commercial sphere is good for America, but it's probably not good for Europe. Fortunately, I doubt European leaders will let it go that far.

Many people still don’t realize times have changed and get shocked when they learn people in the global south are rational human beings with independent self-interests. Too much time believing they’re the only center of the world, so the existence and of an independent “other” angers because it sounds threatening.

The de-globalization trend clearly didn’t start because of Russia, but because of Chinese growth that wasn’t expected by US. They’ve been increasingly throwing in the trash the post-cold war liberal ideological stance in favor of a more nationalistic approach. The Russian war has only been good excuse to accelerate this process on their part.

I agree with the poster who responded when they said they likely expect a “controlled globalization” where they’re in the center but that’s not possible anymore in these days, unless they directly undermine the growth of countries they see as a threat/competition. South-South ties have expanded a lot thanks to the globalization of past decades and that’s not something that can be simply “reversed” as the US expects.

Even if this war has positive effect of pushing Europe closer to them in certain levels like they want, Europe is the continent most dependable of the goods of globalization and that’s why they’re are more resistant to accept this reversal. Europe would be more prejudiced than US and also more closed countries which have embraced less globalization over the years. People buying the warhawk trash propaganda attack Germany so easily but there’s a reason for their response to be more cautious.

For global south specifically, even if some places are more adaptable to de-globalization effects (although everyone would suffer consequences), the important thing right now is to not compromise against globalization and multilateralism. That is the best way of showing globalization cannot be reversed or controlled by few countries according to whatever their self-interest of the moment is.

[Woody]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

The capture of Sloviansk may not be so easy yknow. It’s a sizeable city unlike most of Russia’s gains. And are there even that many Ukrainian troops north of Lyman to the point they couldn’t fall back quickly, genuine question?

Not expecting them to take it until summer if this continues, May 9th ain't happening. The northern pocket I believe doesn't have that many troops and most of the sources I have read say that the most likely scenario is that they will retreat behind the Severy Donets river behind Lyman.

But this is now bordering just pure speculation, at the same time Russians are going crazy with shelling there so it might be a hard time. No sources nor estimates into how many troops are up there.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/DominMa/status/1518264618472382466

Lyman is the priority right now for both sides.

The capture of Sloviansk may not be so easy yknow. It’s a sizeable city unlike most of Russia’s gains. And are there even that many Ukrainian troops north of Lyman to the point they couldn’t fall back quickly, genuine question?

It's obviously concerning to see the Ukrainians lose ground. But there's a reason the towns that the Russians have reportedly captured are quite small. Novotoshkivske has only 2,170 residents. I can't find any data for Zarichne (in Donetsk Oblast, there is a larger town with the same name in Rivne Oblast). The Russians seem to be purposely avoiding assaulting large towns or cities. That is a smart strategy given the Russian Army's focus on armoured warfare because urban combat is terrible for tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, etc. We've seen this earlier in the war, for example, with the failure of the initial Russian attempt to take Kharkiv.

Related to the Battle of Donbass, here's an article about it by (imo) one of the best OSINT accounts who's a War Studies PhD student in London. It's too bad there's a paywall, but I still thought it was worth sharing.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1518208336147197952?s=20&t=XW8QjcRpP7qgbm...

[Woody]

The Zarichne in Donetsk was as of 2017 around 2500 people according to the UA wiki.

Slovyansk is double the population of Rubizhne which Russia occupies now, and it has the larger Kramatorsk to it's south. It's doable like the rest of it's targets. But it's not going to be a cake walk like it was in Melitopol, Berdyansk, Kherson, etc.

And the Donbass offensive unlike other times has been more relying on massive shelling, so when the Russians are near expect even more mass destruction then we have seen so far. They will also be more hesitant to assault the city/urban fighting.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-says-gas-payments-may-be-possible-under-russian-roubles-proposal-without-2022-04-22/

"EU sees way to pay for Russian gas without breaching sanctions"

It seems EU ok's Russia compromise of EU companies paying USD or EUR for Russian gas and Gazprombank immediately converting it to RUB.  This entire affair is a battle of technicalities.  In the end, the fact remains that Russia will continue to export gas and get paid for it while giving Putin some face-saving "victory".  In the meantime RUb surges to 76 which is early Jan 2022 levels.

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

And people who called out the European hypocrisy (from both sides, from the ones asking them to do more to help and the people against the sanctions on Russia) were criticized for pointing the elephant on the room.

The economy vs national security debate is the key to understand the start of this new global order. Easy to push for intense structural de-globalization in rhetoric only but not really do it when you know you’re among the places which most rely on the economic benefits of said globalization and would be among the more affected places if a reversal trend were to start.

That explains the positions of places like Germany who want the war to end for a quick return for business as usual logic, one friendly to their wallets. That’s not going to happen and they will eventually have to be honest about what they care more about: Globalization or Ukraine.

Do you have anything to contribute to this thread beyond preening concern-trolling about muh European hypocrisy and argumentum ad populum fallacies to justify your country's disgusting "neutral" stance toward Russia's genocide? This is getting pathetic.

Have you anything to contribute to this thread beyond hectoring people for not having an opinion in line with your own?

Brazil, and Brazilians, have sovereignty, and clearly prize that. And there are concerns that are at play from a Brazilian POV, that should not be completely shoffed at.

And it's also true that what's being done re: sanctions are in fact deglobalizing the world. They make sense as a short-term tool to weaken Russia's hand, but they come at a terrible strategic cost in the long term if they continue indefinitely. If Russia gets used to sanctions (to some extent, they already are), then our bargaining chips will only diminish and our leverage over them will only weaken.

SWIFT, like many other things, can be regarded as an international institution on which we all rely; cutting Russia from it is not without downsides, as it only encourages the creation of autarkic spheres that rely on themselves, not on international institutions that we, in fact, have the strongest influence over. We could be harming the very international world order we are trying to save. It might be an impossible choice to avoid, but it's still a choice we are making.

And history tells us that the integration of economies, as we see in the modern age, does tend to result in higher standards of living on average. These higher standards of living, in fact, are important if we want a Europe that can afford to flex its muscles. More tax dollars from commerce means more money that can be spent on defense, in fact, implicitly, more money that can be spent defending against Russia should worse come to worse.

This war is about more than just Ukraine, and his conclusion is far from wrong in the gist of it. The de-globalization that is being promoted, indirectly, is not going to just harm Russia, it will hurt Europe too. Severing Russia from Europe in the commercial sphere is good for America, but it's probably not good for Europe. Fortunately, I doubt European leaders will let it go that far.

Many people still don’t realize times have changed and get shocked when they learn people in the global south are rational human beings with independent self-interests. Too much time believing they’re the only center of the world, so the existence and of an independent “other” angers because it sounds threatening.

The de-globalization trend clearly didn’t start because of Russia, but because of Chinese growth that wasn’t expected by US. They’ve been increasingly throwing in the trash the post-cold war liberal ideological stance in favor of a more nationalistic approach. The Russian war has only been good excuse to accelerate this process on their part.

I agree with the poster who responded when they said they likely expect a “controlled globalization” where they’re in the center but that’s not possible anymore in these days, unless they directly undermine the growth of countries they see as a threat/competition. South-South ties have expanded a lot thanks to the globalization of past decades and that’s not something that can be simply “reversed” as the US expects.

Even if this war has positive effect of pushing Europe closer to them in certain levels like they want, Europe is the continent most dependable of the goods of globalization and that’s why they’re are more resistant to accept this reversal. Europe would be more prejudiced than US and also more closed countries which have embraced less globalization over the years. People buying the warhawk trash propaganda attack Germany so easily but there’s a reason for their response to be more cautious.

For global south specifically, even if some places are more adaptable to de-globalization effects (although everyone would suffer consequences), the important thing right now is to not compromise against globalization and multilateralism. That is the best way of showing globalization cannot be reversed or controlled by few countries according to whatever their self-interest of the moment is.

Explain to me how the invasion and annexation of a neutral country by an imperialist European power is in the rational self interest of the global south?

Because basically your argument amounts to ‘America is bad, therefore  Ukraine’

[Virginiá]

Crazy that just 60 Chinooks can cost >5 billion dollars. Especially after seeing other less advanced but still just as vulnerable helicopters get blown out of the sky en masse, it almost doesn't even seem financially practical to use these in forward combat operations. Not unless you have deep pockets anyway ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

German government asked Swiss government for authorization to export Swiss munition to Ukraine. Swiss government declined the request with reference to Swiss neutrality. Background is that the Marder infrantry fighting vehicle, which the Ukrainians want, uses Swiss-produced munition.

Reuters article on it: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/swiss-veto-german-request-re-export-ammunition-ukraine-paper-2022-04-24/

Switzerland exports arms to Saudi Arabia, so that principle isn’t exactly strict.

[Red Velvet]

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-says-gas-payments-may-be-possible-under-russian-roubles-proposal-without-2022-04-22/

"EU sees way to pay for Russian gas without breaching sanctions"

It seems EU ok's Russia compromise of EU companies paying USD or EUR for Russian gas and Gazprombank immediately converting it to RUB.  This entire affair is a battle of technicalities.  In the end, the fact remains that Russia will continue to export gas and get paid for it while giving Putin some face-saving "victory".  In the meantime RUb surges to 76 which is early Jan 2022 levels.

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

And people who called out the European hypocrisy (from both sides, from the ones asking them to do more to help and the people against the sanctions on Russia) were criticized for pointing the elephant on the room.

The economy vs national security debate is the key to understand the start of this new global order. Easy to push for intense structural de-globalization in rhetoric only but not really do it when you know you’re among the places which most rely on the economic benefits of said globalization and would be among the more affected places if a reversal trend were to start.

That explains the positions of places like Germany who want the war to end for a quick return for business as usual logic, one friendly to their wallets. That’s not going to happen and they will eventually have to be honest about what they care more about: Globalization or Ukraine.

Do you have anything to contribute to this thread beyond preening concern-trolling about muh European hypocrisy and argumentum ad populum fallacies to justify your country's disgusting "neutral" stance toward Russia's genocide? This is getting pathetic.

Have you anything to contribute to this thread beyond hectoring people for not having an opinion in line with your own?

Brazil, and Brazilians, have sovereignty, and clearly prize that. And there are concerns that are at play from a Brazilian POV, that should not be completely shoffed at.

And it's also true that what's being done re: sanctions are in fact deglobalizing the world. They make sense as a short-term tool to weaken Russia's hand, but they come at a terrible strategic cost in the long term if they continue indefinitely. If Russia gets used to sanctions (to some extent, they already are), then our bargaining chips will only diminish and our leverage over them will only weaken.

SWIFT, like many other things, can be regarded as an international institution on which we all rely; cutting Russia from it is not without downsides, as it only encourages the creation of autarkic spheres that rely on themselves, not on international institutions that we, in fact, have the strongest influence over. We could be harming the very international world order we are trying to save. It might be an impossible choice to avoid, but it's still a choice we are making.

And history tells us that the integration of economies, as we see in the modern age, does tend to result in higher standards of living on average. These higher standards of living, in fact, are important if we want a Europe that can afford to flex its muscles. More tax dollars from commerce means more money that can be spent on defense, in fact, implicitly, more money that can be spent defending against Russia should worse come to worse.

This war is about more than just Ukraine, and his conclusion is far from wrong in the gist of it. The de-globalization that is being promoted, indirectly, is not going to just harm Russia, it will hurt Europe too. Severing Russia from Europe in the commercial sphere is good for America, but it's probably not good for Europe. Fortunately, I doubt European leaders will let it go that far.

Many people still don’t realize times have changed and get shocked when they learn people in the global south are rational human beings with independent self-interests. Too much time believing they’re the only center of the world, so the existence and of an independent “other” angers because it sounds threatening.

The de-globalization trend clearly didn’t start because of Russia, but because of Chinese growth that wasn’t expected by US. They’ve been increasingly throwing in the trash the post-cold war liberal ideological stance in favor of a more nationalistic approach. The Russian war has only been good excuse to accelerate this process on their part.

I agree with the poster who responded when they said they likely expect a “controlled globalization” where they’re in the center but that’s not possible anymore in these days, unless they directly undermine the growth of countries they see as a threat/competition. South-South ties have expanded a lot thanks to the globalization of past decades and that’s not something that can be simply “reversed” as the US expects.

Even if this war has positive effect of pushing Europe closer to them in certain levels like they want, Europe is the continent most dependable of the goods of globalization and that’s why they’re are more resistant to accept this reversal. Europe would be more prejudiced than US and also more closed countries which have embraced less globalization over the years. People buying the warhawk trash propaganda attack Germany so easily but there’s a reason for their response to be more cautious.

For global south specifically, even if some places are more adaptable to de-globalization effects (although everyone would suffer consequences), the important thing right now is to not compromise against globalization and multilateralism. That is the best way of showing globalization cannot be reversed or controlled by few countries according to whatever their self-interest of the moment is.

Explain to me how the invasion and annexation of a neutral country by an imperialist European power is in the rational self interest of the global south?

Because basically your argument amounts to ‘America is bad, therefore  Ukraine’

You’re the one who’s saying that, in order to paint an anti-sanction position because of the deepening and continuation of the de-globalization effects as support of invasion or something.

Similar strategy from when being against Iraq War made you a terrorist, to engineer a few consensus. Now I guess global south countries need to be involved in a matter that isn’t of their business in order to push a self-destructive globalization reversal that only appeases western national security interests. Weird one sided relationship, when the opposite would never happen.

No difference between the western liberals and conservatives at this point. Reversal of globalization is a consensus since the Obama days, as a reaction to China. Difference is just the silly cultural wars used to justify the ultra-nationalism from either of the sides.

Countries will keep doing business with each other according to their interests. If you think you can control or limit globalization to work in the benefit of selected few only, you’re mistaken and future will show.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/russian-forces-hit-logistics-terminal-of-foreign-weapons-near-odessa-122042400074_1.html

"Russian forces hit logistics terminal of foreign weapons near Odessa"

Russia claims to have destroyed a logistics terminal in Odessa which had a bunch of foreign weapons in transit.  If true it does show a good amount of foreign weapons into Ukraine are seabound versus overland.

Big L for Ukraine if its capability to fight is impacted by Russian actions like this (assuming this is true, of course).

That could be the next escalation: shipping convoys.

Interesting idea. Not necessarily a bad one either.
It's, after all, in the American national interest if weapons are obtained by Ukraine.

[Red Velvet]

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

3) The German intellectuals claiming that Ukraine should surrender are old and increasingly marginalized figures of the 68 generation. They, at best, represent an idealist faction within the SPD. They don't even represent German industrialists who might want to resume business with Russia. Astonishingly, the German party that's the most hawkish on Russia is...the Green Party.

To be honest, this is the first time I heard of such letters so I don't really know what Red Velvet is talking about here. If he has further information about these letters I would like to have it, so that I know who these people are... probably not a really relevant phenomenon though considering that I was unaware of it.

I know that there is a split within the German peace movement between a (probably larger) anti-military aid and a (probably smaller) pro-military aid faction as well as a split between that anti-military aid faction and the Green party, leading to Vice-chancellor Robert Habeck from the Greens recently declaring that pacifism is not an option right now and that peace protestors ought to protest against Putin.

It doesn't - no surprise - contain an explicit call for Ukraine to surrender though. Instead it advocates a stop of German arms deliveries to Ukraine and a negotiated cease-fire that could then include Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of Crimea as Russian, and a referendum over the status of the two Donbas republics.

What you describe in bolded part is a surrender lol

Something that I think is even more “selfish” than being against sanctions only (which is just not doing something against Russia, which no one is obligated to do, but it is treating Ukraine as someone else’s war board)

At same time, understandable if you adopt the German interest POV. A return to status quo would be what is better for them. Not really fair to say to Ukrainians they should accept this bolded stuff though for the sake of a third party interest.

[Storr]

https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/russian-forces-hit-logistics-terminal-of-foreign-weapons-near-odessa-122042400074_1.html

"Russian forces hit logistics terminal of foreign weapons near Odessa"

Russia claims to have destroyed a logistics terminal in Odessa which had a bunch of foreign weapons in transit.  If true it does show a good amount of foreign weapons into Ukraine are seabound versus overland.

Big L for Ukraine if its capability to fight is impacted by Russian actions like this (assuming this is true, of course).

That could be the next escalation: shipping convoys.

Interesting idea. Not necessarily a bad one either.
It's, after all, in the American national interest if weapons are obtained by Ukraine.

The Russian Navy has effectively blockaded shipping in and out of Ukraine, so I doubt much war material is coming in via the Black Sea. The Ukrainians aren't able to do much about it since in 2014 they lost 3/4 of their Navy when the main Ukrainian naval base in Sevastopol was taken over. Dozens of officers, several ship captains, and even two commanders of the Ukrainian Navy Sergei Yeliseyev (a Russian born in Moscow) and Denis Berezovsky (who was commander for one day) defected to Russia.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

3) The German intellectuals claiming that Ukraine should surrender are old and increasingly marginalized figures of the 68 generation. They, at best, represent an idealist faction within the SPD. They don't even represent German industrialists who might want to resume business with Russia. Astonishingly, the German party that's the most hawkish on Russia is...the Green Party.

To be honest, this is the first time I heard of such letters so I don't really know what Red Velvet is talking about here. If he has further information about these letters I would like to have it, so that I know who these people are... probably not a really relevant phenomenon though considering that I was unaware of it.

I know that there is a split within the German peace movement between a (probably larger) anti-military aid and a (probably smaller) pro-military aid faction as well as a split between that anti-military aid faction and the Green party, leading to Vice-chancellor Robert Habeck from the Greens recently declaring that pacifism is not an option right now and that peace protestors ought to protest against Putin.

It doesn't - no surprise - contain an explicit call for Ukraine to surrender though. Instead it advocates a stop of German arms deliveries to Ukraine and a negotiated cease-fire that could then include Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of Crimea as Russian, and a referendum over the status of the two Donbas republics.

What you describe in bolded part is a surrender lol

Something that I think is even more “selfish” than being against sanctions only (which is just not doing something against Russia, which no one is obligated to do, but it is treating Ukraine as someone else’s war board)

At same time, understandable if you adopt the German interest POV. A return to status quo would be what is better for them. Not really fair to say to Ukrainians they should accept this bolded stuff though for the sake of a third party interest.

None of that is really relevant though, because as I implied before it's just 20 random fairly old left-wing to far-left activists drafting a letter nobody in Germany seems to talk about and whose existence I wouldn't have been aware of in the first place hadn't you pointed it out to us.

lol

[Red Velvet]

Europe accepting to pay for Russian gas in roubles? Boris Johnson saying Russia could win the war? German intellectuals writing open letters suggesting Ukraine should surrender? But I thought Europe was united for Ukraine? lol

3) The German intellectuals claiming that Ukraine should surrender are old and increasingly marginalized figures of the 68 generation. They, at best, represent an idealist faction within the SPD. They don't even represent German industrialists who might want to resume business with Russia. Astonishingly, the German party that's the most hawkish on Russia is...the Green Party.

To be honest, this is the first time I heard of such letters so I don't really know what Red Velvet is talking about here. If he has further information about these letters I would like to have it, so that I know who these people are... probably not a really relevant phenomenon though considering that I was unaware of it.

I know that there is a split within the German peace movement between a (probably larger) anti-military aid and a (probably smaller) pro-military aid faction as well as a split between that anti-military aid faction and the Green party, leading to Vice-chancellor Robert Habeck from the Greens recently declaring that pacifism is not an option right now and that peace protestors ought to protest against Putin.

It doesn't - no surprise - contain an explicit call for Ukraine to surrender though. Instead it advocates a stop of German arms deliveries to Ukraine and a negotiated cease-fire that could then include Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of Crimea as Russian, and a referendum over the status of the two Donbas republics.

What you describe in bolded part is a surrender lol

Something that I think is even more “selfish” than being against sanctions only (which is just not doing something against Russia, which no one is obligated to do, but it is treating Ukraine as someone else’s war board)

At same time, understandable if you adopt the German interest POV. A return to status quo would be what is better for them. Not really fair to say to Ukrainians they should accept this bolded stuff though for the sake of a third party interest.

None of that is really relevant though, because as I implied before it's just 20 random fairly old left-wing to far-left activists drafting a letter nobody in Germany seems to talk about and whose existence I wouldn't have been aware of in the first place hadn't you pointed it out to us.

lol

Depends of the scale you’re talking about. At a macro level, it’s nothing. At minimum, it shows that despite the media rhetoric there are different schools of thought instead of the single “acceptable” one by the media.

And imo (you could contest it), when you look at the German political response and compare it to other European countries, I think it reflects a generalized wish of return to normalcy. Not hard to make these assumptions since Germany is poster country of economic neoliberal pragmatism and known for its push in favor of globalization to others, against protectionism.

To have forced such a drastic mentality shift is not just hard, but impossible. There are reasons why Western Europe seems more hesitant than Eastern Europe and almost all are related to the economic history.

[Woody]

Take this with a grain of salt. Ukrainian intelligence is reporting of a offensive build-up of Russian troops in Northern Kherson Oblast on the direction of Kryvyi Rih.

I find that highly unlikely the Russians are going on the offensive there, but I can get the build-up, with the minor clashes going on there.

Source: https://t.me/hromadske_ua/20724

[Hindsight was 2020]

Russia launched a war of aggression on her neighbor and during the course of the war has deliberately shelled civilians targets and committed active genocide on the population and despite such blast horror there has been this group of self proclaimed leftist who have downplayed or even defended Russia’s actions as above any true ideology consistency they are first and foremost anti-West

[Red Velvet]

Russia launched a war of aggression on her neighbor and during the course of the war has deliberately shelled civilians targets and committed active genocide on the population and despite such blast horror there has been this group of self proclaimed leftist who have downplayed or even defended Russia’s actions as above any true ideology consistency they are first and foremost anti-West

Problem with this mentality is that if you go by it, Eastern Europe is more western than Western Europe because of the differentiated reaction.

OR even that pro-globalization / anti-protectionist neoliberals are more leftist than the economic nationalist types. The logic doesn’t click.

Maybe, just maybe, economic interests is what drives these country reactions from Germany to India instead of these artificial ideological abstractions about left/right or pro-west/anti-west.

[DINGO Joe]

https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/russian-forces-hit-logistics-terminal-of-foreign-weapons-near-odessa-122042400074_1.html

"Russian forces hit logistics terminal of foreign weapons near Odessa"

Russia claims to have destroyed a logistics terminal in Odessa which had a bunch of foreign weapons in transit.  If true it does show a good amount of foreign weapons into Ukraine are seabound versus overland.

Big L for Ukraine if its capability to fight is impacted by Russian actions like this (assuming this is true, of course).

That could be the next escalation: shipping convoys.

Interesting idea. Not necessarily a bad one either.
It's, after all, in the American national interest if weapons are obtained by Ukraine.

The Russian Navy has effectively blockaded shipping in and out of Ukraine, so I doubt much war material is coming in via the Black Sea. The Ukrainians aren't able to do much about it since in 2014 they lost 3/4 of their Navy when the main Ukrainian naval base in Sevastopol was taken over. Dozens of officers, several ship captains, and even two commanders of the Ukrainian Navy Sergei Yeliseyev (a Russian born in Moscow) and Denis Berezovsky (who was commander for one day) defected to Russia.

Yeah, I don't know what they're all talking about.  The same ships have been parked at the Port of Odessa since the beginning of the war.  Everything is rail and road at this point.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Russia launched a war of aggression on her neighbor and during the course of the war has deliberately shelled civilians targets and committed active genocide on the population and despite such blast horror there has been this group of self proclaimed leftist who have downplayed or even defended Russia’s actions as above any true ideology consistency they are first and foremost anti-West

Problem with this mentality is that if you go by it, Eastern Europe is more western than Western Europe because of the differentiated reaction.

OR even that pro-globalization / anti-protectionist neoliberals are more leftist than the economic nationalist types. The logic doesn’t click.

Maybe, just maybe, economic interests is what drives these country reactions from Germany to India instead of these artificial ideological abstractions about left/right or pro-west/anti-west.

Why are you acting like the mentality I’m describing is anywhere near the majority of these nations population thinking on the conflict? Red you and the rest of the Russia apology crowd are not even the majority of leftist thinking in the West

[Middle-aged Europe]

Depends of the scale you’re talking about. At a macro level, it’s nothing. At minimum, it shows that despite the media rhetoric there are different schools of thought instead of the single “acceptable” one by the media.

It's not really much of a groundbreaking revelation that in a country of 80 million people (or any country of any size for that matter) not every single one of these 80 million will hold exactly the same opinion on an issue. It's not something that needs to be pointed out, because it's a phenomenon that generally falls under common knowledge.

And imo (you could contest it), when you look at the German political response and compare it to other European countries, I think it reflects a generalized wish of return to normalcy. Not hard to make these assumptions since Germany is poster country of economic neoliberal pragmatism and known for its push in favor of globalization to others, against protectionism.

Again, it was letter written by oldschool left-wing and far-left activists, the very people who are the most opposed to "economic neoliberal pragmatism" or "globalization". The idea that someone like Konstantin Wecker is personally motivated by a desire to return to "neoliberal economic normalcy" strikes me as ludicrous.

To have forced such a drastic mentality shift is not just hard, but impossible. There are reasons why Western Europe seems more hesitant than Eastern Europe and almost all are related to the economic history.

Well, I have personally witnessed quite a drastic mentality shift these past two months. I have witnessed it in myself, in people I know, in members of the political elite and in the available polling data. So I regard your assertion that is "impossible" as objectively false, because that's just not what happened and happens around me.

[Red Velvet]

It's not really much of a groundbreaking revelation that in a country of 80 million people (or any country of any size for that matter) not every single one of these 80 million will hold exactly the same opinion on an issue. It's not something that needs to be pointed out, because it's a phenomenon that generally falls under common knowledge.

Well, not so much common sense, because based on some of the common rhetoric here you would think every person with a different reaction was an anti-western contrarian lol

When in fact, there are German intelectuals and German government itself being hesitant to throw themselves into that kind of push. If it’s actually a “diverse of opinions” topic instead of the one acceptable position only even inside Europe like you say then that just points how non-realistic it is to expect outside places to have a different reaction, to say the least.

Again, it was letter written by oldschool left-wing and far-left activists, the very people who are the most opposed to "economic neoliberal pragmatism" or "globalization". The idea that someone like Konstantin Wecker is personally motivated by a desire to return to "neoliberal economic normalcy" strikes me as ludicrous.

Which evidences it’s not a ideological thing. When you have these leftist types + the economic neoliberal types basically signaling towards the same thing, it naturally points to a specific political culture established over the years that is not related to these left/right abstractions.

Well, I have personally witnessed quite a drastic mentality shift these past two months. I have witnessed it in myself, in people I know, in members of the political elite and in the available polling data. So I regard your assertion that is "impossible" as objectively false, because that's just not what happened and happens around me.

Moving towards something doesn’t mean the shift happens instantly. That’s exactly why Germany is being criticized by both Eastern Europeans and western Warhawks saying their ideological leadership over the Merkel era put the continent in danger.

I agree there’s pressure to move to a more nationalist POV with the de-globalization push as I said, but I don’t expect the political elite to fall in line automatically.