Ukraine

[gypsie]

WWI ended with a peace treaty, essentially setting the stage for WW2. WW2 ended with the unconditional surrender of the Nazis. No matter how much I would prefer the unconditional surrender of Russia, it isn't realistic. We (=the West) will have to try something new once Russia is evicted from Ukraine and cease hostilities. We can hope that it'll be wiser than after WW1.
/Erik

I agree.

I think importantly, WWII ended with the Nuremburg trials.
The Germans HAD to look at their actions square in the face.

Recent propaganda in Russia says Ukrainians were found guilty of shooting down MH17.
Without a Nuremburg the Russians will make up their own story. WWI outcome is inevitable - which makes NATO in Ukraine inevitable. It won't be a Maginot line this time - it'll be a lot more prickly.

I see frost.

[skuthorp]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/19/russias-invasion-ukraine-race-nukes-00069593
I think Defense Secretary Austin has a similar opinion, mayhap a little more openly pessimistic.

[gypsie]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...tlefield-wins/

Bleak outlook for an increasingly hard war from WAPO.

Yuriy Ignat, a spokesman for the Ukrainian air force, said Ukraine does not trust that Russia would abide by any agreement to enter into negotiations and would use any pause in fighting to rebuild its stocks of ammunition and missiles, train its newly mobilized troops, and refit and replace damaged equipment. “Russia needs a truce until spring, and then they will strike with everything they have,” Ignat said. “Plus they will make new missiles, strike us with renewed vigor and destroy us completely. That is Russia’s foreign policy and their plan for peace.”

[Russia had 90,000 troops on the front lines when the conscription drive began — and has since added as many as 100,000, according to an official from a European NATO country, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security matters.

As many as 200,000 more Russian forces are being trained and will arrive in the coming months, probably in at least slightly better shape than the underequipped and ill-prepared men who have arrived so far, the official said. This could help reconstitute Russian fighting power heading into the spring.

“It’s a lot of men,” the NATO country official said. “We all know their quality is poor. They lack equipment. They lack training. Yet there is also a certain degree of quality in quantity — and speed” of getting them to the front.

[Nicholas Carey]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...tlefield-wins/

Bleak outlook for an increasingly hard war from WAPO.

The situation has led to suggestions, most notably from Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark A. Milley, that the time could be ripe for Ukraine to negotiate a political solution to the conflict with Russia -- which almost certainly would require surrendering some territory.

In a news conference, Milley said front lines from Kharkiv down to Kherson are "beginning to stabilize" and suggested that in the longer term it is unrealistic to think Ukraine could recapture the remaining 20 percent of its land held by Moscow -- "unless," he said, "the Russian army completely collapses, which is unlikely."

"The Russian military is really hurting bad," Milley told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday. "You want to negotiate at a time when you’re at your strength and your opponent is at weakness. And it's possible, maybe, that there will be a political solution. All I’m saying is there is a possibility for it -- that's all I'm saying."

Clausewitz made the point that war is an extension of statecraft, through violence.

War serves a diplomatic end. It does not dictate diplomacy.

While Milley is right, in that one should negotiate from a position of strength, it is a political decision as to when and what to negotiate.

At the moment, Ukraine seems to have the Russian invaders, if not on the ropes, certainly reeling and back-pedaling. For Ukraine to negotiate now would be for Ukraine to sue for peace, admitting that they can't defeat the Rus. Something rather at odds with current events.

Perhaps generals should stick to the waging of war and let the politicians, statesmen and diplomats do their jobs.

[dutchpp]

The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, November 20.
https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...nt-november-20

Contains an interesting analysis of the Russian milbloggers.

Key inflections in ongoing military operations on November 20:

• The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported on November 20 that Russian special services are planning false flag attacks on Belarusian critical infrastructure facilities to pressure the Belarusian military to enter the war in Ukraine.[18]
• The Ukrainian General Staff added that Ukrainian officials have not observed the formation of any Belarusian assault groups.[19]
• ISW continues to assess that it is unlikely that Belarusian forces will invade Ukraine.

• Russian and Ukrainian sources reported ongoing fighting along the Svatove-Kreminna line on November 20.[20] Russian sources noted that deteriorating weather conditions are impacting hostilities.[21]

• A Ukrainian military official stated that Ukrainian forces have liberated 12 settlements in Luhansk Oblast since the start of the eastern counteroffensive.[22

• The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed to strike a Ukrainian troop concentration in the area of Novoselivske, Luhansk Oblast.[23] The Russian MoD previously claimed to repel Ukrainian attacks on the settlement, and this claim might indicate that Ukrainian forces advanced to the settlement.
• Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Bakhmut, Avdiivka, and western Donetsk directions.[24]
• Ukrainian officials reported that Russian forces continued to transfer some forces from the east (left) bank of the Dnipro River to other operational directions, but still maintain a significant force presence in southern Kherson Oblast.[25]
• Ukrainian and Russian sources reported that shelling damaged the infrastructure of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP).[26] One Russian milblogger claimed that the shelling came from Russian-controlled territory south of the plant, but most Russian sources accused Ukraine.[27]
• Russian occupation officials may have purged the occupation Mayor of Enerhodar Alexander Volga.[28]
• Some Russian sources claimed that Volga received a promotion within the occupation administration.[29]
  
• Russian military officials continued mobilization measures amid reports of ongoing resistance and poor conditions.[30]

[Rumars]

Right now there isn't much chance of a negotiable peace without a major political shift in one of the countries.

On the russian side, without a political change in Ukraine any territorial gain is not really a victory even if they manage to get all of novorossia, wich is unlikely. Nato membership is unacceptable to Russia on ideological reasons, as would be an international peace keeping force guarding the border. After all, the whole exercise was done in order to keep Ukraine firmly in the RF sphere of influence, a thing they could not achieve economically.

On the ukrainian side there is the problem of guarantees, they don't trust the current russian politicians or international guarantees that don't imply troops on the ground. This situation remains regardless if they manage to retake all the currently occupied territory or not. Nato and the EU will not have them with active border disputes or civil unrest. Becoming a neutral nuclear armed country is only an option if all major players on the planet agree, and that's unlikely.

[skuthorp]

I have referred to the present situation as 'the phoney war' from the beginning of the invasion. I ams still not convinced that it will remain as a limited proxy conflict with the Ukrainians as the meat in the sandwich. Putin is now in a corner and regardless of the impossibility of Russia 'losing' or Ukraine actually 'winning',his situation is diminished every week the war continues. Somewhere, somehow, one day something will snap.

[sandtown]

There are any number of risks involved with the conflict - one that is seldom mentioned is that Ukr and/or Russia might join the growing ranks of extreme ethnic nationalist countries in Europe.

[Gerarddm]

There is no negotiated settlement until Putin is deposed or dead.

And the Ukrainians are not dumb enough to agree to any pause.

[sandtown]

I meant that it's absolutely certain that Russia invaded Ukraine, unprovoked.

If you're disputing the "unprovoked" bit, see my comments in post #6965. I look forward to hearing what you've got to say. Tom

Well I have posted on this issue previously as well . . . at some length in fact. Feel free to look them up.

Just stop and think for a moment . . . when Kissinger, Kennan and many others warned over 15 years ago that the actions of the US and NATO (mostly the US to be sure) were provocative, and then the US went ahead and did what it was specifically warned not to do . . . how can that not be provocative ???

And when the Pope, Erdogan, the former US ambassador to the USSR, and many others point out the provocations - they mostly get personally attacked and their points ignored.

Calling us all Rooskie Bots, or Russian lovers only serves to highlight the irrationality of the criticism.

And I would also argue that there were other more recent provocations as well, including the US role in the 2014 coup, the failure to implement Minsk, the shelling of the Donbas by Ukr forces beginning in 2014 (Russia may have started this - I do not know).

Of course the invasion was wrong, brutal, inexcusable and unjustifiable - but it was indeed provoked.

Good essay here by Jack Matlock, former US ambassador to the USSR https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...ukraine-crisis

So let me close with a Chomsky . . “It’s quite interesting that in American discourse, it is almost obligatory to refer to the invasion as the ‘unprovoked invasion of Ukraine’. Look it up on Google, you will find hundreds of thousands of hits. Of course, it was provoked. Otherwise they wouldn’t refer to it all the time as an unprovoked invasion.” ~ Noam Chomsky

[Gerarddm]

This whole provocation issue dances around the other issue that if Russia played nice in the international arena, there would be no need to so-called 'provoke' it.

When the Soviet Union went down, the West could have squashed what remained like a bug. It consciously did not, because it wanted to encourage a new Russian behavior. Alas, DNA always tells.

I respectfully disagree with Chomsky's take, and as for Kissinger, the back of my hand to him. Even going back to the Nixon era, he was overly cautious about the West prevailing over communism.

[sandtown]

Earlier I posted on the media's rush to war . . and was poo-pooed for my trouble. (From the Institute for Public Accuracy)

On Tuesday, Nov. 15, the Associated Press put out a widely disseminated false story -- which it later acknowledged "erroneously" reported -- that a “senior U.S. intelligence official says Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, killing two people.”

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said: “Hitting NATO territory with missiles. ... This is a Russian missile attack on collective security! This is a really significant escalation. Action is needed." (See "Report: U.S. Told Ukraine to Tread Carefully After Missile Hit Poland" from AntiWar.com.)

"When it comes to our security commitments and Article 5 we've been crystal clear that we will defend every inch of NATO territory," Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder told reporters.

This echoed Biden's declaration while in Poland in March: "We have a sacred obligation under Article 5 to defend each and every inch of NATO territory with the full force of our collective power."


Biden's statement was widely echoed following the AP report as a rallying cry for more war on Tuesday.


Responsible Statecraft in "How a lightly-sourced AP story almost set off World War III" noted that Anders Åslund of the Atlantic Council tweeted: "At long last Russian missiles have hit Poland & killed two Polish citizens. Surprising it did not happen before given the irresponsible Russian behavior. @POTUS: You have promised to defend 'every inch of NATO territory.' Are you going to bomb Russia now?" (A CBS News "Breaking News" report featured former ambassador to Poland Daniel Fried, now with the Atlantic Council.)

[CWSmith]

When the Soviet Union went down, the West could have squashed what remained like a bug. It consciously did not, because it wanted to encourage a new Russian behavior. Alas, DNA always tells.

There is no question that we let the opportunity pass us by and now we are paying the price for our lack of vision.

[CWSmith]

I've only skimmed recent posts, so maybe this is old news?

There are reports of explosions (as many as 10) at a nuclear plant currently under Russian control. True or false? Deliberate or accidental? I don't think this story will end well.

[birlinn]

WBF will not let me reply, with quote, to Sandtown's post #7029, so my comment is:

When is defending your sovereign territory against aggression considered provocative?

[johnw]

It's hard to see an off ramp for either side. If Putin gives up on the special operation, he will lose power and possibly his life. Ukraine is stuck fighting a war of attrition against a larger neighbor, never a good position to be in, but given their history, they can't trust any assurances from Russia, which was actually supposed to be a guarantor of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. I think this only ends when the politics changes dramatically in one country or the other.

[johnw]

WBF will not let me reply, with quote, to Sandtown's post #7029, so my comment is:

When is defending your sovereign territory against aggression considered provocative?

He may have put you on ignore. He really hates it when people ask him the obvious questions about his statements. He seems increasingly isolated.

[skuthorp]

He's correct about the media 'geeing up' enthusiasm for a war. Governments rely on it and for industry it can be enormously profitable…...

[gypsie]

Stealing children.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...olaiv-ukraine/

[Nicholas Carey]

When the Soviet Union went down, the West could have squashed what remained like a bug. It consciously did not, because it wanted to encourage a new Russian behavior. Alas, DNA always tells.

And did a pi$$-poor job of integrating Russia in the European polity. Like TFG's desire to be accepted by the hip kids in Manhattan rather being treated as a bridge & tunnel kid, Russia has always wanted to be treated as a part of Europe.

[skuthorp]

Hmm, 'part of' is somewhat of an understatement I think.

[C. Ross]

I think we should go back to Andrew’s question. He pointed out that an animal or child can be provoked, but how does one provoke a nation?

There is a long list of countries “provoked” by others in the ways Putin claimed about Ukraine and the west. Has any nation not been provoked? Has any nation not provoked others?

Most nations respond to provocation with diplomacy or show of force. It’s acting with force that is the unusual, unlawful, unjustifiable thing. There are many, many ways Russia could have responded to alleged or real provocation by NATO or the EU or Uncle Sam in his starry hat. They didn’t take any of them. They are solely responsible for this war. No one else is.

[gypsie]

Nobody provoked Russia, it's a complete red herring. Its bandied about by Putin apologists because they want to believe the west is bad.
There was zero chance of any European or other country attacking or invading Russia.

Infact, the very reason Russia thought it could get away with invading Ukraine was that 'The West' was incapable of responding – that is; it was weak, it represented no threat.

Russia may say that having NATO on its borders is a threat, but that's just them saying it.
Russian propaganda has stoked xenophobia internally for decades. It's all out of the autocrat-for-dummies playbook. Internally they are told they are under constant threat of invasion. Their paranoia is not backed up by any action from anyone.

Threat or provocation, to Russia, seems to mean; 'we can't do what ever the f#ck we want'.
Ukraine got rid of its nukes to remove a threat from Russia - look what Russia did then; whatever the f#ck they wanted and there was no incentive to stop them.

The only threat Russia has is its myriad of republics opting out. In the west we'd probably say C'est La Vie, in Russia they'll bomb the carp out of you, kill your children, rape your daughters and drop chemical weapons on your hospitals.

If there is a provocation anywhere it is on the Russian side of their [insert country] border.


I also don't buy that Russia was somehow locked out of Europe.
It is locked in, economically, with Europe. It has squandered the opportunity for full participation that its natural resources affords. It could be a rich, well educated, urbane, cosmopolitan country but instead it has chosen to be ridden with corruption and hell bent on allowing the few to become as rich and powerful as they want. They'll even send their sons off to be cannon fodder for them.

Russia never bought in. Its population is passive and its leaders are greedy and corrupt. Two qualities anathema to modern Europe.


Is this evidence of a threat?
https://www.reuters.com/investigates...europe-defence

Europe is waking up to a new need to defend itself since Russia invaded Ukraine.

[JayInOz]

[QUOTE=gypsie;6760142]

Russia never bought in. Its population is passive and its leaders are greedy and corrupt. Two qualities anathema to modern Europe.


/QUOTE]

Pretty much nailed it old son.

[sandtown]

History, especially the newest chapters, teaches us that moscow regards all written deals a toilet paper. .

Sorry, but that statement is simply Bull-Pucky.

The US has a far, far worse record of treaty compliance than does the USSR/Russia.

It is not even close, and you keep on repeating it without a shred of evidence

You often make good points, but they are diminished by this sort of willful blindness.

I would once more respectfully ask you to read this ,, , https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...ukraine-crisis

[JayInOz]

OK Sandbag you win. America is roooly bad. The baddest ever. When it coms to baddiness America is the winner. But this is about Ukraine- now. Provoked, unprovoked, started last year or last century. Whatever. Ukraine has been invaded. By Russia. They are being killed- by Russians. Right now. Lets agree that it's all Americas fault and see if that helps the Ukrainians. JayInOz

[Decourcy]

Yup. The US is the worstest worst. Other than right now, when one country has invaded another. And omigod….it’s not the US that did the invading. So maybe stop with the self loathing when it’s not applicable. Other people and other countries can be bad too ya know. Give them their moment in the limelight of badness…

They are, after all, working hard for that

[Henning 4148]

Clausewitz made the point that war is an extension of statecraft, through violence.

War serves a diplomatic end. It does not dictate diplomacy.

Clausewitz died 1831. Latest since the Nuremberg trials, attacking another nation is regarded as a crime.

[Nicholas Carey]

Sorry, but that statement is simply Bull-Pucky.

The US has a far, far worse record of treaty compliance than does the USSR/Russia.

It is not even close, and you keep on repeating it without a shred of evidence

I have you on ignore (bliss!) but I have to respond.

What is it with with you, that you have to torque everything in into "Russia good, USA bad" scenario?

Please to explain what you find so compelling about Putin's klepto-fascist Russia?

Perhaps it's the high standard of living the ordinary Russian enjoys? Or the civil liberties and freedoms enjoyed by ordinary Russians? Or something else?

Please enlighten us.

[skuthorp]

fifth column

[dutchpp]

The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, November 21.
https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...nt-november-21

Key Takeaways

• Two days of shelling caused widespread damage to the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
• The Russian government is continuing to escalate control over the Russian information space.
• Ukrainian intelligence reported that Russian special services are planning false flag attacks on Belarusian critical infrastructure in an attempt that would likely fail to pressure the Belarusian military to enter the war in Ukraine. ISW continues to assess that it is unlikely Belarusian forces will enter the war.
• A Ukrainian official acknowledged that Ukrainian forces are conducting a military operation on the Kinburn Spit, Mykolaiv Oblast.
• The November 18 video of a Russian soldier opening fire on a group of Ukrainian servicemen while Russian troops were surrendering has served as a catalyst for further division between the Kremlin and prominent voices in the Russian information space.
• Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations in eastern Ukraine amid worsening weather conditions.
• Russian forces continued ground assaults near Bakhmut and Avdiivka.
• Russian forces continued conducting defensive measures and establishing fortifications in Kherson Oblast south of the Dnipro River as Ukrainian forces continued striking Russian force accumulations in southern Ukraine.
• Russian mobilized personnel continue to protest and desert as their relatives continue to publicly advocate against mobilization issues.
• Russian occupation authorities intensified filtration measures and the incorporation of occupied territory into Russia.

[George.]

And now winter has set in. How fast everything freezes in those regions! Reminds me of reading about 1941 and 1942, and how within a couple of November days the Wehrmacht would go from stuck in the mud to unable to dig trenches in the frozen ground.

[WX]

And now winter has set in. How fast everything freezes in those regions! Reminds me of reading about 1941 and 1942, and how within a couple of November days the Wehrmacht would go from stuck in the mud to unable to dig trenches in the frozen ground.

The oil in the vehicle sumps froze and the guns would not fire.

[WszystekPoTrochu]

The oil in the vehicle sumps froze and the guns would not fire.

That kind of winters is rare nowadays, and never was part of what happens in southern Ukraine. The Black Sea isn't big, but it's big enough and warm enough. Machines failing is not their concern. It will get cold enough to kill underequipped draftees, though.

[Landrith]

Our favorite Infantry influencer predictably does not like the M113s being given to Ukraine.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBufXgTnou0 I disagree, it is a taxi, it works and its real field use range is 10 times the M2 Bradley which forgets that it too is only a taxi. No armored personnel carrier can be fighting vehicle on a modern battlefield. As we have seen in Ukraine, even tanks are easily destroyed with light anti armor missiles. The M2 just carries far less and breaks down in 200 miles with parts even the USA cannot resupply its own forces. My last experience as a M2 driver was the turret having an electrical fire during a night time live fire and movement firing range exercise at Ft. Riley. A well maintained older Guard M2, the electrics caught fire, I could not communicate with my own track commander and crew but luckily had made it to a hull down second firing point and the blacked out range safety guy was able to stop me and tell me what was happening. With maybe 10,000 less parts, no computers and a Diesel engine that runs forever, I would bet on a M113 any day.

Its winter war now and real Infantry needs about two more duffel bags of cold weather gear than they can carry in a backpack. I marvel at the documentaries of US Marine Infantry doing training exercises in Norway. They each carry giant backpacks bigger than the soldiers carrying them, and its not enough.

Being in the Guard, I saw trucks still being used in the mech infantry role sometimes. Troop trucks get stuck. M113's don't, low pounds per square inch of tracked foot print, and we seldom took roads, we drove through and over trees. We only feared only hitting stumps at speed in tall grass or going down steep mountain roads if we lost braking. A great taxi. The Bren Gun carrier of the late 20th Century. Everybody forgets the power of mounted Infantry invented by Nathaniel Bedford Forrest. You utilize the speed and range of calvary but you don't fight charging with a sabre when you get to the battlefield, instead you dig in and make range cards. And no one can take the ground you have occupied from you. Especially if everyone you brought has mastered reading grid coordinates and can communicate back to artillery units. Both of these tasks have been problematic for Russian units.