If there is to be some sort of grand old-style military review in Moscow on May 9th, with vast numbers of well-drilled troops in clean uniforms marching past, lots of freshly-painted tanks and artillery pieces etc, the organizers had better get a move on. It will take time to bring all that stuff from regions that haven't been involved in the fighting.
I am assuming that the battered BTGs and equipment from Ukraine will have to stay out of sight and out of mind for the parade.
I would be interested to read your analysis of the benefits and risks of NATO and individual allied countries providing more aid, personnel etc to Ukraine. Putin seems to have drawn many lines in the sand and a number of them have been crossed with no apparent repercussions.
What are the short and long term consequences of either not increasing the level of aid to Ukn or escalating to the point of active participation?
I can only think that failing to stop Russia's subjugation of Ukn will result in a dire future for Western liberalism. However, even should the Russian advances be defeated, what is then the best way forward to end the violent cycle of West vs. East. Can Russia ever become a true ally of its western neighbors.
I wouldn't count on it. Countries that lose empires/domination over neighbors but aren't utterly destroyed due to their imperial aggression (like Germany and Japan were) tend to be butt-hurt about it for a long time. Just look at Hungary and Serbia. Serbs may start another Bosnian war and Hungary is too small and powerless to start anything so they simply elect a hard-right anti-liberal leader again and again. That doesn't bode well for Russia. Like Germany after WWI, Russia after the fall of the USSR was humiliated but not destroyed in a war it started. And so Hitler/Putin rose.
My guess would have to be that Russia becomes economically and militarily a shrunken state, possibly even humiliated, and in hock to its larger and more powerful partner. Much like the UK after Suez. The difference is that Russia is an authoritarian state, so will react in a different way. However....can a successor to Putin (or one several years down the line) harness the same energy as Hitler post-1928? The equivalent scenario would be Hitler coming to power in 1933 only to find 70% of Germany's coal production couldn't be exported, and the world had moved on. And he had no ability to expand the Reichswehr because he had no foreign exchange reserves. And Krupp, MAN, etc couldn't produce any armoured vehicles because no one would sell them the raw materials they needed. And East Peussia wanted to secede.
I'd say the humiliation of Russia after the dissolution of the USSR is akin to the humiliation of Germany after losing WWI (in neither case was the core state invaded and destroyed due to imperial overreach), so Putin is in the Hitler role this time. The big difference is that unlike the West back then selling out Czechoslovakia and being unable to effectively aid Poland, the West is able and willing to aid Ukraine this time (and there is nothing like a USSR standing to stab Poland in the back).
But this time, the Allies won't be able to march to the capital city and force Putler to suicide.
So I think a more analogous war is the Korean War. In that war, the junior weaker partner in the Communist alliance fought against the West to an inconclusive stalemate in a proxy war in Asia and Cold War I started. This time, the junior weaker partner in the Authoritarian Axis is fighting the West likely to some sort of stalemate in a proxy war in Europe (Russia seems likely to keep some parts of Ukraine like Crimea), kicking off Cold War II.
In your opinion, can the Russian ground forces, even if concentrated in the east, achieve a sufficiently-robust encirclement of Ukrainian forces in the Donbass? Or would this be more a technical "encirclement" that in fact fails to prevent the escape of significant Ukrainian personnel? Would continued Western supplies be a sufficient balancing factor if Ukrainian ground forces escape encirclement by abandoning vehicles and equipment? Saying this, I can't see an effective encirclement by Russian ground forces, given their losses and general disorganisation, so this is very much a worst-case.
Putin has already suffered a humiliating strategic defeat. He has failed to eject the Ukrainian government of "Nazis" and "drug addicts" and his military has been exposed as a grossly incompetent paper tiger. Does anyone now not believe that NATO forces would utterly crush the Russian military in a direct confrontation? The Russian economy -- already a near basket-case -- is on the verge of complete collapse. Russia -- and nearly all things Russian -- is a pariah throughout the world, except in other pariah states. The only thing Putin has succeeded at is turning Russia into a larger version of North Korea or Venezuela.
Agree entirely with all that you say. Putin/Russia can still be dangerous, but a) very unlikely to go the nuclear route and b) no longer seen as a leading military power. I remain convinced that those around Putin will eventually conspire to remove him, although I doubt a successor would be much to global taste, unless they withdraw, pay massive reparations, provide accountable security guarantees, and change the nature of their government. I can't seem them doing that, but I can see a chastened Russia turning inwards and renouncing foreign adventurism, at least for a time.
Another good article and another ripper understatement by Lawrence: “Putin is not a hearts and minds man”. Only the naïve believe Bucha is the only scene of Russian atrocities (of the close and personal type rather than bombing and shelling civilians). There’s going to be no shortage of deeply committed recruits for Ukrainian insurgencies. I suspect that would be the case even if they interred all men aged 20-60.
Much as I’d love to be wrong, I can’t see Putin ‘calling it a day’ in the next month or even year. Unlike the biblical prodigal son he’s going to have to eat a mountain of pig-swill before he comes to his senses. He’d sooner rule over a ruined and largely depopulated Donbass, perhaps through an extended line of puppet rulers even if he need to sends the troops in every few months after they get over-thrown by ungrateful Ukrainians. The pain of a ruined economy and thousands of dead troops a year won’t hurt him enough to put away his dream of creating a new Russian empire – if he even gets to hear about the pain his policies are inflicting on his people.
Does Putin actually need a strategy? He controls what ordinary Russians see and hear. He can tell them whatever he wants alongside the bread and circuses on May 9, regardless of whether it bears any relationship to reality. Given that’s the case he may as well gamble .
Lashing out with no strategy is not a smart way to stay in power long. Anyway, even if no one rises up, I wouldn't be surprised if remote regions of that huge country try to split away as the center weakens significantly.
Clear headed articulation oddly enough brings a calming and determined mind state. We have to help and give Mr Zelensky all the weapons he asks for. NOW NOW NOW
I recently read an article on Hitler's take over of Austria. He claimed he was destined to unite all the German speaking peoples. He threatened Austria with total military conquest. He was not worried that the world would do anything to stop or interfere. He was not concerned with the destruction it would cause. Sounds as if Putin did a pretty good job of reading up on his history. The only difference was that Austria caved to Hitler's demands but the Ukraine did not to Putin's.
"I recently read an article on Hitler's take over of Austria. He claimed he was destined to unite all the German speaking peoples. He threatened Austria with total military conquest. "
No very good example. Most Austrians wanted to join Germany after WW1 but were not allowed to do so, therefore, Hitler had many supporters in Asutria before 1934.
Better analogy is probably Czechoslovakia (which had a lot of Germans who Hitler said wanted to unite with him). If the West had supported Czechoslovakia instead of selling them out to Hitler, Hitler could have been stopped there just as Putin has been stopped in Ukraine.
What I can gather from media reports is that the Russians are removing from the Kiev region to concentrate on what they really want. More Black Sea access for their navy and the coal reserves of Donbas. Which might still produce steel. You will tell they are super-serious if/when they make moves on Odessa. They are moving their invasion to securing Crimea, Donbas aka the Crimea–Donbass Corridor ......
"Putin seems to be changing his strategy from trying to take over Kyiv to striking the Donbas region and fully conquering it: On day 40 of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Russian forces are repositioning for a renewed assault on eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainian military has been regaining a lot of territory in the north as Russian forces there are pulling out.
Reports of war crimes and other atrocities committed by Russian forces keep appearing, while the world reacts in anger and disgust.
Kyiv Is Out, Donbas Is In
According to the Ukrainian military, Moscow is building up troops for an offensive in eastern Ukraine. In addition to units that have been drawn from other fronts, the Russian military is sending fresh formations to the region."
Eh, only an idiot destroys a large part of his army in an feint. He wanted to get rid of Zelensky and take over Ukraine. But since Putin obviously failed in that, he has to try to take the Donbas and try to sell that as a victory to Russians.
The Anglo-American/Davos globalist elites are clearly willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. Jennifer Nuland/Soros(Davos)/NATO (America) started this war in 2014. Send Nuland, Soros and Klaus to the front lines so they too can bleed with their Nazi proxies.
Just "Thanks!" - for such clear and elegant writing/analysis of this atrocity.
If there is to be some sort of grand old-style military review in Moscow on May 9th, with vast numbers of well-drilled troops in clean uniforms marching past, lots of freshly-painted tanks and artillery pieces etc, the organizers had better get a move on. It will take time to bring all that stuff from regions that haven't been involved in the fighting.
I am assuming that the battered BTGs and equipment from Ukraine will have to stay out of sight and out of mind for the parade.
I would be interested to read your analysis of the benefits and risks of NATO and individual allied countries providing more aid, personnel etc to Ukraine. Putin seems to have drawn many lines in the sand and a number of them have been crossed with no apparent repercussions.
What are the short and long term consequences of either not increasing the level of aid to Ukn or escalating to the point of active participation?
I can only think that failing to stop Russia's subjugation of Ukn will result in a dire future for Western liberalism. However, even should the Russian advances be defeated, what is then the best way forward to end the violent cycle of West vs. East. Can Russia ever become a true ally of its western neighbors.
Re "lines in the sand". Another good example of Putin painting himself to the world as a bully who can't quite pull it off.
I wouldn't count on it. Countries that lose empires/domination over neighbors but aren't utterly destroyed due to their imperial aggression (like Germany and Japan were) tend to be butt-hurt about it for a long time. Just look at Hungary and Serbia. Serbs may start another Bosnian war and Hungary is too small and powerless to start anything so they simply elect a hard-right anti-liberal leader again and again. That doesn't bode well for Russia. Like Germany after WWI, Russia after the fall of the USSR was humiliated but not destroyed in a war it started. And so Hitler/Putin rose.
My guess would have to be that Russia becomes economically and militarily a shrunken state, possibly even humiliated, and in hock to its larger and more powerful partner. Much like the UK after Suez. The difference is that Russia is an authoritarian state, so will react in a different way. However....can a successor to Putin (or one several years down the line) harness the same energy as Hitler post-1928? The equivalent scenario would be Hitler coming to power in 1933 only to find 70% of Germany's coal production couldn't be exported, and the world had moved on. And he had no ability to expand the Reichswehr because he had no foreign exchange reserves. And Krupp, MAN, etc couldn't produce any armoured vehicles because no one would sell them the raw materials they needed. And East Peussia wanted to secede.
I'd say the humiliation of Russia after the dissolution of the USSR is akin to the humiliation of Germany after losing WWI (in neither case was the core state invaded and destroyed due to imperial overreach), so Putin is in the Hitler role this time. The big difference is that unlike the West back then selling out Czechoslovakia and being unable to effectively aid Poland, the West is able and willing to aid Ukraine this time (and there is nothing like a USSR standing to stab Poland in the back).
But this time, the Allies won't be able to march to the capital city and force Putler to suicide.
So I think a more analogous war is the Korean War. In that war, the junior weaker partner in the Communist alliance fought against the West to an inconclusive stalemate in a proxy war in Asia and Cold War I started. This time, the junior weaker partner in the Authoritarian Axis is fighting the West likely to some sort of stalemate in a proxy war in Europe (Russia seems likely to keep some parts of Ukraine like Crimea), kicking off Cold War II.
"Can Russia ever become a true ally of its Western neighbors?". Stranger things have happened Margaret but that would be a very strange thing indeed.
We knew Putin was not a “hearts and minds” kind of guy all along.
16 years in the KGB, made Lt. Colonel before the Berlin Wall was torn down.
He knows about, and likely participated, in torturing Russians in the basement of the Lubyanka.
His style in Chechnya was like brutal interrogations that grind victims into submission or death. That’s what his Ukraine strategy now comes down to.
Putin is more of a “rubber hose and electrodes” kind of guy.
Loved your last sentence, Oldrealist
In your opinion, can the Russian ground forces, even if concentrated in the east, achieve a sufficiently-robust encirclement of Ukrainian forces in the Donbass? Or would this be more a technical "encirclement" that in fact fails to prevent the escape of significant Ukrainian personnel? Would continued Western supplies be a sufficient balancing factor if Ukrainian ground forces escape encirclement by abandoning vehicles and equipment? Saying this, I can't see an effective encirclement by Russian ground forces, given their losses and general disorganisation, so this is very much a worst-case.
Putin has already suffered a humiliating strategic defeat. He has failed to eject the Ukrainian government of "Nazis" and "drug addicts" and his military has been exposed as a grossly incompetent paper tiger. Does anyone now not believe that NATO forces would utterly crush the Russian military in a direct confrontation? The Russian economy -- already a near basket-case -- is on the verge of complete collapse. Russia -- and nearly all things Russian -- is a pariah throughout the world, except in other pariah states. The only thing Putin has succeeded at is turning Russia into a larger version of North Korea or Venezuela.
Agree entirely with all that you say. Putin/Russia can still be dangerous, but a) very unlikely to go the nuclear route and b) no longer seen as a leading military power. I remain convinced that those around Putin will eventually conspire to remove him, although I doubt a successor would be much to global taste, unless they withdraw, pay massive reparations, provide accountable security guarantees, and change the nature of their government. I can't seem them doing that, but I can see a chastened Russia turning inwards and renouncing foreign adventurism, at least for a time.
Another good article and another ripper understatement by Lawrence: “Putin is not a hearts and minds man”. Only the naïve believe Bucha is the only scene of Russian atrocities (of the close and personal type rather than bombing and shelling civilians). There’s going to be no shortage of deeply committed recruits for Ukrainian insurgencies. I suspect that would be the case even if they interred all men aged 20-60.
Much as I’d love to be wrong, I can’t see Putin ‘calling it a day’ in the next month or even year. Unlike the biblical prodigal son he’s going to have to eat a mountain of pig-swill before he comes to his senses. He’d sooner rule over a ruined and largely depopulated Donbass, perhaps through an extended line of puppet rulers even if he need to sends the troops in every few months after they get over-thrown by ungrateful Ukrainians. The pain of a ruined economy and thousands of dead troops a year won’t hurt him enough to put away his dream of creating a new Russian empire – if he even gets to hear about the pain his policies are inflicting on his people.
Very insightful. More is at: https://raptureandendtimes.com/2022/01/22/russia-and-gog-ukraine-today-israel-tomorrow/
Putin is what he claims to be fighting against.
Does Putin actually need a strategy? He controls what ordinary Russians see and hear. He can tell them whatever he wants alongside the bread and circuses on May 9, regardless of whether it bears any relationship to reality. Given that’s the case he may as well gamble .
Lashing out with no strategy is not a smart way to stay in power long. Anyway, even if no one rises up, I wouldn't be surprised if remote regions of that huge country try to split away as the center weakens significantly.
Clear headed articulation oddly enough brings a calming and determined mind state. We have to help and give Mr Zelensky all the weapons he asks for. NOW NOW NOW
I recently read an article on Hitler's take over of Austria. He claimed he was destined to unite all the German speaking peoples. He threatened Austria with total military conquest. He was not worried that the world would do anything to stop or interfere. He was not concerned with the destruction it would cause. Sounds as if Putin did a pretty good job of reading up on his history. The only difference was that Austria caved to Hitler's demands but the Ukraine did not to Putin's.
"I recently read an article on Hitler's take over of Austria. He claimed he was destined to unite all the German speaking peoples. He threatened Austria with total military conquest. "
No very good example. Most Austrians wanted to join Germany after WW1 but were not allowed to do so, therefore, Hitler had many supporters in Asutria before 1934.
Better analogy is probably Czechoslovakia (which had a lot of Germans who Hitler said wanted to unite with him). If the West had supported Czechoslovakia instead of selling them out to Hitler, Hitler could have been stopped there just as Putin has been stopped in Ukraine.
What I can gather from media reports is that the Russians are removing from the Kiev region to concentrate on what they really want. More Black Sea access for their navy and the coal reserves of Donbas. Which might still produce steel. You will tell they are super-serious if/when they make moves on Odessa. They are moving their invasion to securing Crimea, Donbas aka the Crimea–Donbass Corridor ......
"Putin seems to be changing his strategy from trying to take over Kyiv to striking the Donbas region and fully conquering it: On day 40 of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Russian forces are repositioning for a renewed assault on eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainian military has been regaining a lot of territory in the north as Russian forces there are pulling out.
Reports of war crimes and other atrocities committed by Russian forces keep appearing, while the world reacts in anger and disgust.
Kyiv Is Out, Donbas Is In
According to the Ukrainian military, Moscow is building up troops for an offensive in eastern Ukraine. In addition to units that have been drawn from other fronts, the Russian military is sending fresh formations to the region."
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/04/putin-has-a-new-plan-for-ukraine-conquer-donbas/
Eh, only an idiot destroys a large part of his army in an feint. He wanted to get rid of Zelensky and take over Ukraine. But since Putin obviously failed in that, he has to try to take the Donbas and try to sell that as a victory to Russians.
The Anglo-American/Davos globalist elites are clearly willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. Jennifer Nuland/Soros(Davos)/NATO (America) started this war in 2014. Send Nuland, Soros and Klaus to the front lines so they too can bleed with their Nazi proxies.
I agree, he’ll see that as a risk - there are few certainties in this.
Fascinating, well-informed analysis!