Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Worth noting that it is unofficially understood that Ukrainian accession to NATO is a nonstarter at present - the governments of quite a few member states are extremely not keen on the idea. And everyone in the foreign policy world knows this.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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

You've answered your own question.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There are some countries in NATO I see finding every trick in the book they can offer to get out of going to war over Lithuania.

The text of the treaty is clear enough. It wouldn't matter. This, of course, is precisely why allowing Ukraine into NATO is secretly unpopular amongst the governments of many NATO member states - including yours.

Now that Russian military conflict is more plausible than just a theoretical, I don't think certain states in NATO would even let the Baltic states in now if they had the vote today. (Ditto the EU, the likes of Ireland and Malta should be going to war if needed to defend Lithuania's territorial integrity.)

Perhaps, but this is not relevant. They are members now and have been for over fifteen years.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Same reason that successive French governments have insisted on a 'right' to use airstrips deep into Subsaharan Africa. It's a Postimperial thing.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Full invasion like this one?

Yes although I read that Kyiv falling in 72 hours is US intelligence's worst case assessment. I think that number was given to Congress because of the criticism they received over Afghanistan.

You don't really need specific intelligence rumours to know that a direct assault on the capital with the aim of taking it in days is certainly being contemplated: there's really no other military reason for the massing of troops along Ukraine's border with Belarus. I wonder, if it comes to it, whether they'll take the short-cut through the Blighted Land or carefully go around it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If there's an invasion then 'optics' are really the least important of things...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's this persistence in believing that 'alignment' must be relevant still as it made the World so much easier to understand back when they were at Tech in the 70s and 80s.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

NATO accession is only possible with the unanimous approval of all existing NATO states. Even the American government, off the record, does not support Ukrainian accession. Everyone involved knows this.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

"Unsuccessful", huh? If Putin wanted it to make look at least somewhat credible he should have been willing to sacrifice that pawn. Effort: 4/10.

There's something about the sheer cartoonish amateurism that is almost impressive, in a through the looking glass sort of way.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh do shut up. Things could get very serious - a full scale war with modern weaponry and explosives would be significantly nastier than a lot of people realise - but there's no prospect of that. NATO will not intervene military, neither will the United States alone. Everyone involved has been extremely clear about this.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Er, so, a delegation of British political figures - including Mick Antoniw (AS for Pontypridd and a member of the Welsh Government), Adam Price (leader of Plaid Cymru), Mick Whelan (General Secretary of ASLEF) and the journalist Paul Mason have turned up in Kiev with the aim of showing solidarity with the people of Ukraine against official government travel advice.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Artillery (however defined) has been the most prestigious and tactically important element in the Russian military since the 18th century and there's a tendency to shape strategy and tactics around this fact wherever possible.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Powerful Anthony Eden vibes to this rambling mess of a speech from Putin.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, thank you random new poster whose only contribution to the thread is to smear the majority of posters here as savage Russophobes.

Charming stuff isn't it. I note that one must also have a 'recent' ancestral connection to a particular territory before having any views as to its politics or general fate: a genuinely stupid position, of course, and really quite a remarkable one for a poster on this forum of all forums to take.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Won't Germany just burn more coal?

No. There's a misconception that this issue is about power generation,* but it's actually more about heating and especially domestic heating. So it would mean importing more gas from elsewhere and, over the long-term, moving towards alternative methods of domestic heating. This would have the effect of shrinking the market for Russian gas in Germany - putting that at risk for the sake of post-imperial adventurism is certainly a choice, but we are where we are.

_{*The nuclear angle is also misunderstood: Germany hasn't spontaneously shut down all its nuclear power stations, it has simply opted not to replace any of its existing ones. All of its nuclear power stations were (are) fairly old, with the newest - the ones still in operation - opening in 1988-9. In practice a lot of other governments have done the same thing, largely on cost grounds.}

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It was Western policies that created the Russia we have today.

Putin literally said yesterday that the existence of Ukraine was an aberration and the former Soviet republics had no right to secede. If NATO hadn't expanded then Russia would have invaded and annexed the Baltic states and be Finlandising Poland.

Yes, this isn't 'rational response to NATO enlargement', it's Your Brain On Post-Imperialism.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It would not surprise me if you dug into their finances you see some funds coming from Russia.

There is a political party presently in power in a large European country that has been dragging its feet on sanctions and which, yes, has received significant financial contributions from Putin-associated Russian oligarchs over the past decade, but it is not the German Green Party.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Correct me if I am wrong.  In 2021 nuclear power from 6 nuclear plants provided for 13% of Germany energy needs.  3 of them were shut down end of 2021 and the other 3 will be shut down at the end of 2022.

And all but one of the remaining six (yes, only six) nuclear power stations in Great Britain will be gone within six years and will not be replaced. Proposals for replacements are made frequently enough and sometimes projects even start, but, curiously, they never get very far. The difference between existing German and British policy on this matter is largely cosmetic.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would be very careful about believing everything you see online. There are a lot of false claims flying around and it is still very early: troop movements, even these days, are a lot slower than people think.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why on Earth would the Russians bring the fighting to Chernobyl?

It's due north of Kiev and, in theory, a handy short-cut.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

https://twitter.com/business/status/1496921478721327110

This is horrifying. Kabul all over again.

Not remotely comparable. Have a look at a map: Kiev is extremely vulnerable to an assault from the north and isn't far off being indefensible against a numerically superior aggressor.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's the clear reality and the truth at this point. Kiev is under siege, 1.5 days into the offensive, and Zelensky sued for peace publicly. Asking for an armistice with enemy troops on your land is not an action to take when winning, Finland still lost territory from the Winter War despite performing much better than expectations. I get that you're cheerleading for a side here but reality doesn't care about that.

Firstly, the capital being under direct threat in the second day of the invasion of a large country sounds impressive at first, very impressive, right up until you look at a map and notice where Kiev actually is. It is highly exposed to any aggressive push from the north and borderline indefensible from that direction as well.

Secondly, no one serious is saying that the Ukrainian army is winning. What has been noticed, and not just here and not just on twitter, is that they have held up a lot better than expected. People have also been surprised at the Russian attack plan with so many independent thrusts on so many different fronts, something that smacks of the sort of incompetence driven by excessive political interference in military decisions. It is still overwhelmingly likely that the Russian military 'wins' due to the substantial imbalance in the size of forces and also resources involved, but it is plainly not going to plan, and this is an important and relevant thing to note.

Finally, your sneering is unpleasant and reflects poorly on your character.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm aware of the geography and that Kiev is highly vulnerable to an attack from Belarus. However this should have also been obvious to the Ukrainian military who could have been preparing defenses in depth between the border and Kiev, which they either didn't do or did a very poor job. Whether it's impressive or not, Zelensky is now under threat himself and that's what probably forced him to ask for an armistice. It's definitely not at all comparable to the Winter War, which saw the Finns repel multiple Soviet attacks and keep the Soviets off their land for 3 months and had a 5-1 casualty ratio. I think there has been a moving of goalposts by the West where the Russians are expected to win instantly and anything short of that is a disappointment, despite the situation on the ground where Ukraine will likely still lose within a week.

If you were truly aware of the geography you might note that in between Kiev and the border is the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone and I'm not sure if the Ukrainian government or military would have been particularly keen to dig in and create trenches, redoubts and strong-points there for certain fairly obvious reasons. They could perhaps have done more further south, but the open geography would immediately make that difficult - there's not much point in creating strong defences that are easy simply wheel around and bypass.

In general, of course, you are not being honest here and I suspect there is little point in further engagement.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is big:

https://twitter.com/alexrossmusic/status/1497242538415046657

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Been thinking about the fact that Russia is holding so much of their army back for no apparent reason.  The only thing that makes sense to me is that logistically they wouldn't be able to handle it.  We've seen reports of their issues in Belarus, and reports of Russian soldiers raiding homes for food and clothing.

A couple of issues here. Firstly, once armies get over a certain size they become very cumbersome to manoeuvre and committing all that you would theoretically wish to at once becomes difficult unless things have been very carefully planned, particularly if the intention is to use transport infrastructure (and if you aren't, then things are a lot slower). It's absurd, but traffic jams can be a real problem. Secondly (and really this relates directly to the first thing), there may be issues with logistics and (especially) supply lines. Thirdly, although I obviously can't comment on how it's affecting deployment in practice (and if the doctrine here is being ignored - possible! - then it won't explain a thing), but in theory each regiment or brigade in the Russian Army consists of three battalions, two of which are largely comprised of contract soldiers and one of which is entirely comprised of conscripts and raw recruits and which is supposed to function in a support capacity, rather than be deployed to the front, unless absolutely necessary.