As far as I can tell the Xi-Putin summit was a giant nothingburger. We knew the two get on fine and China sits squarely in Russia’s corner. But sits seems the operative word. The most flaccid Ukrainian ally seems to have given more active help than China has given Russia. A post Putin Russia may well reflect how little they got out of China (who happily buys their oil at a steep discount) compared to how well paid they were when they traded with Europe.
I cannot see Putin relinquishing any of his ill-gotten gains voluntarily though I could see him offering a cease fire if he believed he had no prospect of further advances. Whether the Ukrainians would accept one it is another matter. The only thing that would stop this war would be the expulsion of the Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. We ought to give the Ukrainians as much help as they need to achieve this.
The US and China believe the fragmentation of the Russian Empire is inevitable, and desirable. A quick win for Russia or Ukraine does not hasten this ending. A slow discreditation of the Russian state as incompetent and willing to kill the empires young men for nothing, that works.
Russia is not a member of the UN or it's Security Council. That honor belongs to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which was dissolved by Yeltsin. There is nothing in the UN Charter about subsequent states succeeding to the position of former states.
Right, but what does that mean? The article also says that no-one in the GA objected to the succession and the UN Charter is deficient on defining succession rules. That kind of leaves it all up in the air, which is undesirable, but doesn't seem to provide a solid basis for concluding definitively one way or another whether the Russian Federation is a legitimate member. So let us just say it's an unsettled matter; but given this, should we seriously believe that even under present conditions a GA vote could be garnered to expel them from the body? I kind of doubt it. It's now looking to me like a question that is real, but primarily has nuisance value.
That's a question the State Department needs to answer, perhaps if the question makes it into the public sphere. If I had a twitter account I would give it max publicity.
I think it's worthwhile but I don't do Twitter or such either. However, if it were gotten into the hands of an MSNBC or CNN program host, that just may do the trick.
Maybe if there were a swarm of email to MSNBC and CNN. Rachel@msnbc.com is a start, Of course she doesn't read her mails and if too long and fullof ancillary stuff they are ignored.
I can't see this conflict ending until Ukraine can hit targets deep inside Russia and cause the same level of destruction and casualties there as it is suffering. But that may give Putin his excuse to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine
I don't believe the West would allow Ukraine to do this. and looking at the long trajectory of Russian history, hitting it from the outside is not a winning strategy. It will have to rot from within so that its own people cease to support it. Then there will be real change.
The key point for Ukrainian strikes inside Russia is not tit for tat but to attack manpower and equipment concentrations, transport hubs and lines of communication and so forth on the routes into Ukraine.
That's an angle that's being watched closely. Using tactical nukes will change the scenario. Many nations are putting their heads in the sand on that one and Putin is gambling on it.
The nuclear weapons for Belarus was announced just last night, so there really hasn't been much time for international reaction. It would be unbelievable that the US remains silent - at least behind the scenes, if not overtly, about this. Not clear what their options are as long the weapons are not deployed.
Am sure that options for a tactical nuke attack have been well discussed within NATO and the US. Am well aware that Belarus could be the sacrificial lamb but it's still speculation. Not sure what crossing the red line would be. It's all a first time scenario for the world. The doomsday clock is ticking.
Chris, I have a sense that a lot of this may be performative, because the war is not going well for Russia, at least in regard to their own expectations, and many countries are supporting Ukraine, so it would seem the sabre-rattling is intended to chill the West and perform for the home audience. Beyond what you are suggesting has been discussed, we have also heard in a number of newscasts some time back that the US has advised Russia what's in store should they ever deploy. I think we may learn more as the week unfolds. All said, it remains very concerning.
Russia is still very much involved in the Syrian civil war, fighting alongside Assad's forces and Iran. Whereas the west does have some moral principles when prosecuting a war and has to face public criticism in the media and at home, Russia isn't restricted in that sense. As no western country is willing to take them on militarily, Russia is free to do what they want for as long as they want
Yes, I agree with most of this, but I would add they can only do what they want as long as they can do it, and from what we're hearing even the West is facing supply constraints on how quickly and how much they can get into Ukraine at the present moment; field accounts suggest the situation is even much worse for the Russians, perhaps motivating the recent meeting with Xi and the supply of drones from Iran. My biggest fear is that Russia and China could have sealed a barter agreement of oil for weapons, and I don't know what the West can do about it, because the trade may be conducted in ways that are very hard to detect. This is speculative of course, but one thing for sure - they didn't spent 3 days on tourism and mutual admiration.
A Xi-brockered peace would be made to look like a Russian victory against Nato encroachment on Russia. It would separate the USA from the process. Xi is much more interested in using Putin and the war to Chinese advantage. To llok like the Peace Maker adds to his prestige and power. I Xi sees that the Russians cannot win only cause more destruction he will let Putin know who his new boss, ie, best friend is
Broadcasters want action now. However the few months training with very limited supplies of new potent weapons is inadequate for a force that cannot afford to lose men for partial gains. Committing to a land offensive without state of the art AirPower, with limited range artillery, and a mere pocket of decent tanks is a recipe for defeat. Patience should be urged while Ukraine builds its forces in number and potency. Zelensky has the political capital to wait and build. He should do so.
Russia is the natural resources powerhouse of Europe and China. Having burned its bridges with Europe, they are left with a single customer paying “beggar the producer” prices.
Putin tells his people that the west seeks to break up the Russian Empire. He’s lying. The west and China see this as inevitable. Resulting the CCP see resource rich eastern Siberia becoming a myriad of client states in its sphere of influence. The US sees the end of Russia’s nuclear threat and its global promotion of anti American politics. Hence Ukraine and Russia are denied the weapons they need to get the war finished quickly. In the expectation that in Russia the centre will not be able to hold.
Rich Russians send their children to be educated, keep their mistresses and store their proceeds of kleptocracy in europe. It’s time Russia’s officer class, political, government and business elite, bring Europe home to Russia by openly discussing joining the EU.
As an aside,
For 20 years Putin has lived in the chauffeur driven personal security bubble of a national leader. Meanwhile the world of the everyday has had a personal communication and knowledge revolution with internet connected smart phones. When he entered the bubble the USSR ended only 10 years ago. Outside the bubble, only people over 55 remember the USSR.
There was one report on MSNBC about China agreeing to deliver drones to Russia. If true, and depending on what kind and amount, this could be a very adverse development for Ukraine. While I expect the Chinese capitalists can take Russia to the cleaners, the actual operational outcomes of the recent summit, both open and perhaps clandestine, need to be watched very carefully. I'm apprehensive about what was really agreed in this 3-day meeting - perhaps much we don't know, and it may be not good for Ukraine.
As far as I can tell the Xi-Putin summit was a giant nothingburger. We knew the two get on fine and China sits squarely in Russia’s corner. But sits seems the operative word. The most flaccid Ukrainian ally seems to have given more active help than China has given Russia. A post Putin Russia may well reflect how little they got out of China (who happily buys their oil at a steep discount) compared to how well paid they were when they traded with Europe.
I cannot see Putin relinquishing any of his ill-gotten gains voluntarily though I could see him offering a cease fire if he believed he had no prospect of further advances. Whether the Ukrainians would accept one it is another matter. The only thing that would stop this war would be the expulsion of the Russian forces from Ukrainian territory. We ought to give the Ukrainians as much help as they need to achieve this.
The US and China believe the fragmentation of the Russian Empire is inevitable, and desirable. A quick win for Russia or Ukraine does not hasten this ending. A slow discreditation of the Russian state as incompetent and willing to kill the empires young men for nothing, that works.
Russia is not a member of the UN or it's Security Council. That honor belongs to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which was dissolved by Yeltsin. There is nothing in the UN Charter about subsequent states succeeding to the position of former states.
I think you are mistaken
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/member-states/russian-federation
Oops - OK, coming straight from the UN, that would seem to correct the matter.
But that has to be approved by the General Assembly. A country just can't up and say that it is a member of the UN.
It turns out that this is not so clear-cut - there is disagreement amongst international lawyers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_United_Nations
From your link: "the succession's technical legality has been questioned by some international lawyers."
Right, but what does that mean? The article also says that no-one in the GA objected to the succession and the UN Charter is deficient on defining succession rules. That kind of leaves it all up in the air, which is undesirable, but doesn't seem to provide a solid basis for concluding definitively one way or another whether the Russian Federation is a legitimate member. So let us just say it's an unsettled matter; but given this, should we seriously believe that even under present conditions a GA vote could be garnered to expel them from the body? I kind of doubt it. It's now looking to me like a question that is real, but primarily has nuisance value.
Interesting - never thought of that. So why is Russia still a member of the Security Council?
That's a question the State Department needs to answer, perhaps if the question makes it into the public sphere. If I had a twitter account I would give it max publicity.
I think it's worthwhile but I don't do Twitter or such either. However, if it were gotten into the hands of an MSNBC or CNN program host, that just may do the trick.
Maybe if there were a swarm of email to MSNBC and CNN. Rachel@msnbc.com is a start, Of course she doesn't read her mails and if too long and fullof ancillary stuff they are ignored.
Short and to the point.
Correct.
I can't see this conflict ending until Ukraine can hit targets deep inside Russia and cause the same level of destruction and casualties there as it is suffering. But that may give Putin his excuse to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine
I don't believe the West would allow Ukraine to do this. and looking at the long trajectory of Russian history, hitting it from the outside is not a winning strategy. It will have to rot from within so that its own people cease to support it. Then there will be real change.
The key point for Ukrainian strikes inside Russia is not tit for tat but to attack manpower and equipment concentrations, transport hubs and lines of communication and so forth on the routes into Ukraine.
That's an angle that's being watched closely. Using tactical nukes will change the scenario. Many nations are putting their heads in the sand on that one and Putin is gambling on it.
The nuclear weapons for Belarus was announced just last night, so there really hasn't been much time for international reaction. It would be unbelievable that the US remains silent - at least behind the scenes, if not overtly, about this. Not clear what their options are as long the weapons are not deployed.
Am sure that options for a tactical nuke attack have been well discussed within NATO and the US. Am well aware that Belarus could be the sacrificial lamb but it's still speculation. Not sure what crossing the red line would be. It's all a first time scenario for the world. The doomsday clock is ticking.
Chris, I have a sense that a lot of this may be performative, because the war is not going well for Russia, at least in regard to their own expectations, and many countries are supporting Ukraine, so it would seem the sabre-rattling is intended to chill the West and perform for the home audience. Beyond what you are suggesting has been discussed, we have also heard in a number of newscasts some time back that the US has advised Russia what's in store should they ever deploy. I think we may learn more as the week unfolds. All said, it remains very concerning.
Russia is still very much involved in the Syrian civil war, fighting alongside Assad's forces and Iran. Whereas the west does have some moral principles when prosecuting a war and has to face public criticism in the media and at home, Russia isn't restricted in that sense. As no western country is willing to take them on militarily, Russia is free to do what they want for as long as they want
Yes, I agree with most of this, but I would add they can only do what they want as long as they can do it, and from what we're hearing even the West is facing supply constraints on how quickly and how much they can get into Ukraine at the present moment; field accounts suggest the situation is even much worse for the Russians, perhaps motivating the recent meeting with Xi and the supply of drones from Iran. My biggest fear is that Russia and China could have sealed a barter agreement of oil for weapons, and I don't know what the West can do about it, because the trade may be conducted in ways that are very hard to detect. This is speculative of course, but one thing for sure - they didn't spent 3 days on tourism and mutual admiration.
Possibly, though I suppose a member would need to bring a case. Do you know how that works and whether it would be likely?
Good summary.
A Xi-brockered peace would be made to look like a Russian victory against Nato encroachment on Russia. It would separate the USA from the process. Xi is much more interested in using Putin and the war to Chinese advantage. To llok like the Peace Maker adds to his prestige and power. I Xi sees that the Russians cannot win only cause more destruction he will let Putin know who his new boss, ie, best friend is
Even more risks of some sort sounds ominous
Broadcasters want action now. However the few months training with very limited supplies of new potent weapons is inadequate for a force that cannot afford to lose men for partial gains. Committing to a land offensive without state of the art AirPower, with limited range artillery, and a mere pocket of decent tanks is a recipe for defeat. Patience should be urged while Ukraine builds its forces in number and potency. Zelensky has the political capital to wait and build. He should do so.
Russia is the natural resources powerhouse of Europe and China. Having burned its bridges with Europe, they are left with a single customer paying “beggar the producer” prices.
Putin tells his people that the west seeks to break up the Russian Empire. He’s lying. The west and China see this as inevitable. Resulting the CCP see resource rich eastern Siberia becoming a myriad of client states in its sphere of influence. The US sees the end of Russia’s nuclear threat and its global promotion of anti American politics. Hence Ukraine and Russia are denied the weapons they need to get the war finished quickly. In the expectation that in Russia the centre will not be able to hold.
Rich Russians send their children to be educated, keep their mistresses and store their proceeds of kleptocracy in europe. It’s time Russia’s officer class, political, government and business elite, bring Europe home to Russia by openly discussing joining the EU.
As an aside,
For 20 years Putin has lived in the chauffeur driven personal security bubble of a national leader. Meanwhile the world of the everyday has had a personal communication and knowledge revolution with internet connected smart phones. When he entered the bubble the USSR ended only 10 years ago. Outside the bubble, only people over 55 remember the USSR.
There was one report on MSNBC about China agreeing to deliver drones to Russia. If true, and depending on what kind and amount, this could be a very adverse development for Ukraine. While I expect the Chinese capitalists can take Russia to the cleaners, the actual operational outcomes of the recent summit, both open and perhaps clandestine, need to be watched very carefully. I'm apprehensive about what was really agreed in this 3-day meeting - perhaps much we don't know, and it may be not good for Ukraine.
At Amiens 8 th August 1918 ,the allies finally having the right combination plus suprise , the German defences did not last three hours