Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Lykaon]

TimTurner's incessant bothsidesism is legitimately sickening.

Agreed. There’s no both sides in this war. You can make the case that there hasn’t been as clear cut good vs. evil war like this since WWII. Russia is irredeemable at this point, its soldiers are thugs and rapists, itss people are sheep, and its leader is a sick ape that desperately needs to be put down

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It seems y'all did not see this post either.

Ukraine is deserving of munitions that fit within its doctrines and which it can effectively use and it's a good thing the Biden Administration has worked diligently to ensure it is well aided.
If cluster munitions aid the Ukrainians (who like the Russians rely on artillery), then we ought to give them it. Ukraine ought to be trusted to know what its needs are. And on this issue RFK is posturing.
It's not our place to micro-manage the campaign of the Ukrainians, our allies, anymore than it is the rightful place of FDR's War Department to micro-manage how Stalin, our ally, fought Barbarossa.

Keep on hating. But in that process you show all the intellect of an ape.
I have been very actively supportive of punishing Russia ever since the first month showed Ukraine could hold up and I got over the fear of Russia successfully overturning our global order. I plan to continue doing so, being supportive of using the Machievellian methods in the toolbox as needed to get there.

What I do not support is undermining stability, and not considering the global long-term view. The global long-term view is more important, if forced to choose, than the desires of the Ukrainian state being fulfilled, and Ukraine in the long term is very likely merely one in what might be a series of conflicts we will have to take into account in our foreign policy.

Just as our Cold War foreign policy apparatus had to deal with Korea, Japan, the risk of nuclear winter, and a number of civil conflicts globally, Ukraine is not going to be alone in a series of conflicts a post-Bush* White House will have to deal with.

If you want to accuse me of anything, please, accuse me of being a US establishment shill. That'd be more accurate, if still not really true.
*=Post-Bush, because a lot of the conflicts with some kind of impact on US interests started under Obama and so using the wording of "Post-Obama" does not seem right here.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

In dreamland, Ukraine gets everything on its wish list and solves all its issues successfully.
In the real world compromise and realpolitik reign more often than not and what you want and what you get are two distinct things.
Ukraine's leadership is right to be pushy, but some kind of post-war relationship with Russia is inevitable, the question is what tenor it has and what it focuses on. This war will partially decide that, and post-war needs will also partially decide that.  If we treat Ukraine poorly enough, it might find itself having to get closer to Russia (relatively), and it might be mutually beneficial too (for both UA and RU).

After the war, Ukraine can easily enter the sphere of the PRC: in spite of everything, the Ukrainian government sees no obstacles to this. As for relations with Russia, until February 24, 2023, Ukrainians and Russians cooperated very well at the international level (for example, I participated in the Ukrainian Uzhgorod club of tabletop role-playing games, which had members throughout the CIS, but was closed on February 24 due to the fact that its founders became military volunteers), but it is unlikely that in the next fifty years it will be possible to restore what was destroyed just on February 24.

Even after 2014 it was impossible to imagine a full-scale war between Ukrainians and Russians, these two peoples ruled together in the Soviet Union and did not distinguish each other by nationality. Especially when you consider that a large number of Russians have Ukrainian surnames and a large number of Ukrainians have Russian. February 24 erased the history of their relationship, now we are in a new reality.

[NOVA Green]

Meanwhile a group of far-right Republicans in the US House are threatening to hold Ukraine funding hostage during the upcoming annual Defense spending bill.

American public support for continued funding for Ukraine has increased significantly over the past couple months, after taking a bit of a dip in the lull between the successful UKR offensive of last Summer and fall, and the Russian conquest of Bakhmut which is now basically just a pile of rubble.

A group of far-right-wing House Republicans pushing to load up the annual defense bill with socially conservative policies on abortion, race and gender have another demand: severe restrictions on U.S. military support for Ukraine.

The group’s proposals on military aid stand no chance of passing the House, where there continues to be strong bipartisan support for backing Ukraine’s war effort, or going anywhere in the Senate.

The House on Wednesday began debating the $886 billion measure, sidestepping the rifts as Republican leaders toiled behind the scenes to placate ultraconservative lawmakers who are demanding votes to scale back Ukraine aid and add social policy dictates. But those disputes will eventually have to be resolved to pass the bill, which had been expected to receive approval on Friday — a timetable that is now in doubt as the hard right threatens to hold up the process.

They are seeking votes on a series of proposals that would hamstring U.S. support for Ukraine, including one to curtail all funding for Kyiv until there is a diplomatic solution to the conflict and another that would end a $300 million program to train and equip Ukrainian soldiers that has been in place for nearly a decade.

“Congress should not authorize another penny for Ukraine and push the Biden administration to pursue peace,” Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, argued to lawmakers on the House Rules Committee this week, appealing to them to allow votes on several proposals she has written on the topic. “Ukraine is not the 51st state of the United States of America.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/us/politics/defense-bill-republicans-ukraine-war.html

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

In dreamland, Ukraine gets everything on its wish list and solves all its issues successfully.
In the real world compromise and realpolitik reign more often than not and what you want and what you get are two distinct things.
Ukraine's leadership is right to be pushy, but some kind of post-war relationship with Russia is inevitable, the question is what tenor it has and what it focuses on. This war will partially decide that, and post-war needs will also partially decide that.  If we treat Ukraine poorly enough, it might find itself having to get closer to Russia (relatively), and it might be mutually beneficial too (for both UA and RU).

After the war, Ukraine can easily enter the sphere of the PRC: in spite of everything, the Ukrainian government sees no obstacles to this. As for relations with Russia, until February 24, 2023, Ukrainians and Russians cooperated very well at the international level (for example, I participated in the Ukrainian Uzhgorod club of tabletop role-playing games, which had members throughout the CIS, but was closed on February 24 due to the fact that its founders became military volunteers), but it is unlikely that in the next fifty years it will be possible to restore what was destroyed just on February 24.

Even after 2014 it was impossible to imagine a full-scale war between Ukrainians and Russians, these two peoples ruled together in the Soviet Union and did not distinguish each other by nationality. Especially when you consider that a large number of Russians have Ukrainian surnames and a large number of Ukrainians have Russian. February 24 erased the history of their relationship, now we are in a new reality.

So it would possible, if UA feels deserted/underserved by the US, then it would turn to China? That certainly could throw a wrench into some calculations by the Russians and others...
Chinese advances into Eastern Europe are both perhaps under-reported on, and probably more influential in long-term impact than most realize.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Meanwhile a group of far-right Republicans in the US House are threatening to hold Ukraine funding hostage during the upcoming annual Defense spending bill.

American public support for continued funding for Ukraine has increased significantly over the past couple months, after taking a bit of a dip in the lull between the successful UKR offensive of last Summer and fall, and the Russian conquest of Bakhmut which is now basically just a pile of rubble.

A group of far-right-wing House Republicans pushing to load up the annual defense bill with socially conservative policies on abortion, race and gender have another demand: severe restrictions on U.S. military support for Ukraine.

The group’s proposals on military aid stand no chance of passing the House, where there continues to be strong bipartisan support for backing Ukraine’s war effort, or going anywhere in the Senate.

The House on Wednesday began debating the $886 billion measure, sidestepping the rifts as Republican leaders toiled behind the scenes to placate ultraconservative lawmakers who are demanding votes to scale back Ukraine aid and add social policy dictates. But those disputes will eventually have to be resolved to pass the bill, which had been expected to receive approval on Friday — a timetable that is now in doubt as the hard right threatens to hold up the process.

They are seeking votes on a series of proposals that would hamstring U.S. support for Ukraine, including one to curtail all funding for Kyiv until there is a diplomatic solution to the conflict and another that would end a $300 million program to train and equip Ukrainian soldiers that has been in place for nearly a decade.

“Congress should not authorize another penny for Ukraine and push the Biden administration to pursue peace,” Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, argued to lawmakers on the House Rules Committee this week, appealing to them to allow votes on several proposals she has written on the topic. “Ukraine is not the 51st state of the United States of America.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/us/politics/defense-bill-republicans-ukraine-war.html

I'm not surprised that the Maoists find it easiest to get along with the far right, for example with the ruscists.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

So it would possible, if UA feels deserted/underserved by the US, then it would turn to China? That certainly could throw a wrench into some calculations by the Russians and others...
Chinese advances into Eastern Europe are both perhaps under-reported on, and probably more influential in long-term impact than most realize.

Indeed. From the point of view of the PRC's geopolitics, there is almost no difference between the CIS and Africa.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

snip

Marjorie Taylor Greene must see an angle here...using Biden's willingness to aid Ukraine to demagogue to her support base and encourage less internationalist views on the right.
Her..."courageous" introduction of some legislative thing to pull us out of NATO shows she does not care about the events of the wider world as much as her narrow demagoguing.
Good to see grownups run the State Department and know better.

[NOVA Green]

Washington Post has an article up regarding the "Zelensky-Biden" rift regarding potential NATO membership for Ukraine.

As typical, they tend to get the skinny on high level Washington administration's lines of thought on various matters, as well as in this case access to high level European officials.

Personally, although I understand that at some point NATO needs to grow some teeth, especially considering previous "guarantees" have twice been met with Russia testing the limits in Ukraine, it really doesn't make sense that an immediate forward progress for Ukrainian entry into NATO should be the priority at this time.

As it is, looks like in the near future we will have a Turkish drone manufacturing facility groundbreaking project in Ukraine, looks like Rheinmetall will be building a tank mfg and repair facility in Ukraine...

Hopefully European GDP spending on military needs will hit the average 2% of GDP targets, and in particular the provisioning of artillery shells to UKR, in which Europe has a much higher potential MFG   factory throughput than the US armaments industry.

The calculus of wanting to contain the conflict inside Ukraine’s borders and avoid nuclear escalation imbues every action the administration takes, including a complicated effort to distance NATO, as an organization, from the billions of dollars in lethal aid supplied to Kyiv. That insistence means that military aid is coordinated among the members nations outside of official NATO directives.

“The White House doesn’t want to link NATO to lethal aid,” said a senior NATO diplomat who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk frankly about the tricky calculation between the United States, NATO’s biggest and most influential power, and other perspectives within the alliance. “The sensitivity there is different among different allies.”

As I had recently posted "parsing" and careful choice of verbiage was the word of the day.

Inside the negotiating room, the U.S. team could be terse, unwilling to be drawn out at length about their views on the word craft around how to phrase NATO’s approach to Ukraine’s membership aspirations, said diplomats who took part in the talks.

“They don’t say much about why” they take the stances they take, a second senior NATO diplomat said. “References to reforms. No unity on the issue.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/07/12/biden-vilnius-nato-ukraine/

[NOVA Green]

Graverobbers... the more things change perhaps more they stay the same in Russia, where once again purging is back in fashion, not to mention the whitewashing of history.

(No paywall--- but might want to check it out for the photos)

The corresponding photos, showing graves marked with pyramids instead of the customary crosses or monuments, were published by Kremlin propaganda outlets.

According to reports, the images were captured at one of the most well-known cemeteries for Wagner mercenaries in Stanitsa Bakinskaya, Krasnodar Krai, Russia.

Meanwhile, wreaths adorned with the symbols of the Wagner PMC, led by Wagner mercenary company owner Yevgeny Prigozhin, who has apparently fallen out of favor with Kremlin dictator Vladimir Putin following a failed military coup, were removed from the mercenaries’ graves and gathered in a large heap.

Simultaneously, in other burial sites of the deceased Wagner mercenaries in Ukraine, unidentified individuals have started removing the flags that were previously erected there.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/surovikin-s-pyramids-installed-on-wagnerites-graves-photo/ar-AA1dLFl0?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=12

[NOVA Green]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

[oldtimer]

In dreamland, Ukraine gets everything on its wish list and solves all its issues successfully.
In the real world compromise and realpolitik reign more often than not and what you want and what you get are two distinct things.
Ukraine's leadership is right to be pushy, but some kind of post-war relationship with Russia is inevitable, the question is what tenor it has and what it focuses on. This war will partially decide that, and post-war needs will also partially decide that.  If we treat Ukraine poorly enough, it might find itself having to get closer to Russia (relatively), and it might be mutually beneficial too (for both UA and RU).

After the war, Ukraine can easily enter the sphere of the PRC: in spite of everything, the Ukrainian government sees no obstacles to this. As for relations with Russia, until February 24, 2023, Ukrainians and Russians cooperated very well at the international level (for example, I participated in the Ukrainian Uzhgorod club of tabletop role-playing games, which had members throughout the CIS, but was closed on February 24 due to the fact that its founders became military volunteers), but it is unlikely that in the next fifty years it will be possible to restore what was destroyed just on February 24.

Even after 2014 it was impossible to imagine a full-scale war between Ukrainians and Russians, these two peoples ruled together in the Soviet Union and did not distinguish each other by nationality. Especially when you consider that a large number of Russians have Ukrainian surnames and a large number of Ukrainians have Russian. February 24 erased the history of their relationship, now we are in a new reality.

China is by tradition isolationist, even when a color revolution happened in Kazakhstan they didn't even make a tweet, they don't lift a finger for anyone even if they come begging. That's why they have no allies or even spheres.

As for the rest it's also false, war between Russia and Ukraine was inevitable since the summer of 1991, it was largerly feared over the 1990's that it would be over Crimea, and it got close in 1992-93, the 1994 Budapest Treaty temporarily defused things until Poland became too strong.

A general state of war in the former USSR was always considered inevitable as typical post-colonial conflicts, same reasons (badly drawn borders) it's just the size that's different.

[oldtimer]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

When you lose a war you become unpopular, it always happens.

I doubt that Putin has a military strategy that's worth anything.

He still keeps people that could easily be American agents (where else all those details about even blood supplies could have come from on the eve of the war) and are definitely terrible at their official job.

He obviously suffers from Roman Emperor disease, which happens when someone is in power for too long.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

When you lose a war you become unpopular, it always happens.

I doubt that Putin has a military strategy that's worth anything.

He still keeps people that could easily be American agents (where else all those details about even blood supplies could have come from on the eve of the war) and are definitely terrible at their official job.

He obviously suffers from Roman Emperor disease, which happens when someone is in power for too long.

If this is what is happening...all while he's actually still in a winning position...I doubt he would like to see what happens if Ukraine manages to fight it back all the way to pre-2022 lines, or even takes Crimea. Of course, if he shifted blame on the West for this, and convinced them America was to blame, that could be a safety valve allowing him more room to operate.
He's definitely not at the height of his abilities, that much is pretty clear.

[2952-0-0]

There is an old Chinese saying: "弱國無外交" or weak states do not have the luxury of an independent foreign policy which dates back to the Third Kingdoms period.    Every state, especially those which are not Great Power, has to live and make decisions with the situation they are realistically facing and not the situation they ideally would want to live in.

But doesn't that also apply to Russia, whose leadership class have been living under the delusion that they could play as a global superpower when, in all honesty, Russia is not much more materially powerful than Brazil or Indonesia?

[NOVA Green]

Regardless of multiple reports regarding "Ukrainian Sappers" being perhaps the most dangerous military position to be in as a means of attempting to advance field by field against entrenched Russian positions in the Southern Front. Def Mon reminds us of how impactful Russians mines are in the effort to prevent a UKR military breakthrough.

I would imagine this would be much less of an obstacle if UKR breakthrough the secondary and tertiary lines on the Southern Front.

https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1678641318166159365?s=20

[oldtimer]

So looks like, despite obvious caveats regarding polling in modern day Russia, it does appear that support for the War in Ukraine has dropped significantly in just a few months.

Needless to say these numbers are likely significantly higher than the numbers posted below.

*** NO PAYWALL ***

Russian public support for Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine has dropped significantly and many more people are now in favor of holding peace talks, according to an opinion poll conducted last month.

Just 45 percent of respondents were in favor of continuing what the Kremlin calls a "special military operation" in Ukraine, a survey conducted between June 16 and 19 by Russian Field, a nonpartisan Moscow-based research company, found. That's down 9 percentage points from a survey the company conducted in April 2022, just weeks after the war started.

In the new poll, 44 percent said Russia should engage in peace talks—up from 35 percent of respondents in April 2022.

In its latest poll, Russian Field surveyed a group of 1,604 people across Russia by phone. It was conducted a few weeks into the start of Ukraine's counteroffensive to recapture the territories seized by Russia throughout the war.

More than half of respondents (54 percent) would prefer for Russia to engage in peace negotiations if a second wave of mobilization is required to continue the "military operation."

Meanwhile, more than one-third (35 percent) are in favor of continuing hostilities if Putin were to announce a fresh wave of conscripted men to fight in Ukraine.

And more than a third of respondents (35 percent) also said the war needn't have started. That's the highest figure since the start of the war, when 28 percent answered in March 2022 that if they had the opportunity to return to the past and change the decision about starting the war, they would.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russian-public-approval-of-ukraine-war-dropping-rapidly-survey/ar-AA1dLNk6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e425b79ff3e94f3aaea95d2d79d62ee0&ei=24

Polling wasn't great for the Chechen wars for Yeltsin in the 1990s. There is historical precedent for something like this polling dip. For perhaps a majority of the 1990s the Chechen Wars were quite unpopular.
If and when declining approvals have a very significant impact on Putin's strategies might be anyone's guess, however.

When you lose a war you become unpopular, it always happens.

I doubt that Putin has a military strategy that's worth anything.

He still keeps people that could easily be American agents (where else all those details about even blood supplies could have come from on the eve of the war) and are definitely terrible at their official job.

He obviously suffers from Roman Emperor disease, which happens when someone is in power for too long.

If this is what is happening...all while he's actually still in a winning position...I doubt he would like to see what happens if Ukraine manages to fight it back all the way to pre-2022 lines, or even takes Crimea. Of course, if he shifted blame on the West for this, and convinced them America was to blame, that could be a safety valve allowing him more room to operate.
He's definitely not at the height of his abilities, that much is pretty clear.

Lets put in simple terms the events of the past month.

Putin is the biggest obstacle for Russia to win this war, but also was the biggest obstacle to any political settlement until this NATO summit happened.

There is no prospect of victory or peace for his country while he is in charge of it.

However America's commitment to give Ukraine NATO membership the moment the war ends means there can be no peace.
Russia will continue to fight regardless of Ukraine pushing back to the 1991 line.

Now it's like the Palestinian conflict.
The change of leaders will not bring peace, you need a change in policy from both sides that accomodates nationalists from both sides.

How do you get it ?
I envision a type of Dayton Accord, like Ukraine becoming super-Bosnia without the High Representative (unless it alternates between Russia and America).

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

A very chad like here.

https://twitter.com/Stealx/status/1678741923400384512

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Lets put in simple terms the events of the past month.

Putin is the biggest obstacle for Russia to win this war, but also was the biggest obstacle to any political settlement until this NATO summit happened.

There is no prospect of victory or peace for his country while he is in charge of it.

However America's commitment to give Ukraine NATO membership the moment the war ends means there can be no peace.
Russia will continue to fight regardless of Ukraine pushing back to the 1991 line.

Now it's like the Palestinian conflict.
The change of leaders will not bring peace, you need a change in policy from both sides that accomodates nationalists from both sides.

How do you get it ?
I envision a type of Dayton Accord, like Ukraine becoming super-Bosnia without the High Representative (unless it alternates between Russia and America).

Most here would probably prefer that occurring over this war going on. The incentive structure is however unfortunately in such a state that Putin has no reason to even rationally assume it is in his interest to de-escalate.
I assume the steps taken at the NATO summit were helpful for American coalition building and Ukrainian security, but one cannot assume that 100%, because hindsight is 20/20.
Our foreign policy professionals here in Washington will have a lot to think about going forward.

[jaichind]

They're both mourning the murders of Polish civilians by Ukrainian nationalists/Nazi collaborators during WWII:

https://twitter.com/EliotACohen/status/1678044002136858625?s=20

But Ukraine still have streets named after Bandera when it was Bandera's OUN that was behind these massacres.   I guess for unity sake Duda is not making a big deal of this.

Bandera is far from the most murderous person to be honored in Ukraine's national mythology. Russian media loves to make it a big deal out of it though to drive a wedge between Poland and Ukraine to no avail.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/19376

"Polish Lawmakers Call for Accepting Volhynia Massacre Responsibility"

Looks like Poland lawmakers are not letting it go

As the resolution highlights, on that day, “Ukrainian units of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), often supported by Ukrainian civilians, attacked 99 villages inhabited by Poles in the former Volhynia Voivodeship and killed a significant part of their population.”

The document underscores the parliamentarians’ focus on the importance of “Polish-Ukrainian reconciliation,” a process that has been developed over the years by representatives from both nations. It should also encompass the “recognition of guilt and commemoration of the victims of the Second World War.”

This resolution is more for the domestic Polish audience and not really for Ukraine.  And for the same domestic audience reasons Ukraine will not can not do what the Polish Sejm is calling for.

[jaichind]

This entire Ukraine joining NATO is a classic deadlock

a) Ukraine cannot join NATO until the war with Russia ends
b) Russia will not end the war with Ukraine unless Ukraine promises not to join NATO
c) The deadlock of a) and b) could be broken by the collapse of Ukraine which would remove the political basis of Ukraine joining NATO
d) The deadlock of a) and b) could also be broken by regime change in Russia in which case there is not more need for Ukraine to join NATO

I've highlighted in bold a giant error in your calculations. It's not a condition, but blackmail of a street bully:
"Drop the pepper spray or I'll hit you with a bat!"
The interlocutor is using the pepper spray, bully is throwing a bat and running away.

In fact, the Kremlin carried out a full-scale attack on Ukraine precisely because Ukraine is NOT a member of NATO.

I will argue that if Ukraine and NATO had stated ahead of time that Ukraine will never enter NATO the chances of a Russian invasion would have gone down significantly. 

State-to-state negotiations on foreign policy alignment are not blackmail.  I see nothing wrong with Russia asking Ukraine to play a role similar to what Finland did vis-a-vis USSR during the Cold War.   Namely, Ukraine does not take an anti-Russian position and does not join in any alliance directed at Russia, and in return, Russia will not force a pro-Russian orientation on Ukraine nor interfere in Ukraine's domestic issues.  I am not saying that Ukraine must accept since that is a matter of relative balance of power between Russia and Ukraine as well as other key stakeholders but making such a request is standard SOP in international power politics.

[jaichind]

There is an old Chinese saying: "弱國無外交" or weak states do not have the luxury of an independent foreign policy which dates back to the Third Kingdoms period.    Every state, especially those which are not Great Power, has to live and make decisions with the situation they are realistically facing and not the situation they ideally would want to live in.

But doesn't that also apply to Russia, whose leadership class have been living under the delusion that they could play as a global superpower when, in all honesty, Russia is not much more materially powerful than Brazil or Indonesia?

Clearly, this logic applies to all powers including Russia and USA where there are clear limits to their powers and require the need to prioritize.  The level of geostrategic power that Russia has, clearly, is much greater than Brazil and Indonesia. 

https://newsinfrance.com/us-chief-of-staff-milley-says-there-are-three-superpowers-in-the-world/

"US Chief of Staff Milley says there are three superpowers in the world"

There are three superpowers in the world – the United States, China and Russia, General Mark Milley, chairman of the US Army Chiefs of Staff, said during a speech at the National Defense University.

[Lord Halifax]

The level of geostrategic power that Russia has, clearly, is much greater than Brazil and Indonesia. 

that has traditionally been the case, but Russia is a declining power (demographics, industrial base, technological level, military capability, lack of soft power) and needs to get used to being a second tier country. It's the last of the European empires, and has no realistic path to maintaining world power status. Only the United States, China and India are natural great powers in the 21st century. The Ukraine war happened because the Russian elite in general, and Putin in particular, don't have a realistic view of their country's place in the world.

[Sol]

I envision a type of Dayton Accord, like Ukraine becoming super-Bosnia without the High Representative (unless it alternates between Russia and America).

Nobody wants that. The thing about the Dayton Accord is that is was a necessary structure to deal with the fact that Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats all were going to have to live in the same country, which meant baroque power-sharing agreements, outside oversight in the form of the High Representative, etc. It's important to stress that the structure of the Dayton Agreement is terrible if you want to actually run a successful and normal country; Bosnia made the tradeoff that that was worth it in exchange for peace and a guarantee that no ethnic group would be able to politically dominate.

Ukraine is not like that; the situation is one of an outside power attacking. The only place in Ukraine where there's significant support for what Russia is doing is in Crimea, and maybe in the pre-2022 Donbass occupied zones as a result of pro-Ukrainian people fleeing. There's no need to impose an ineffectual powersharing government in this sort of context.