changegonnacome

I know folks want to believe that Putin/Russia having got all they want......have still somehow "lost"........but let's be clear Russia has/will achieve their strategic objects (NATO expansion off the table / Separatist regions annexed). The only argument left is that the price Putin had to pay was way higher than he expected........but what is the cost of anything versus an existential threat like NATO coming to your doorstep threatening your very existence & security.........

https://citywire.com/funds-insider/news/wednesday-papers-ukraine-can-t-join-nato-says-zelensky/a2382549 "Zelensky said yesterday that Ukraine had to accept that the “door of Nato” had closed." "Russia has continued to pressure Ukraine to formally renounce its intention to join Nato and formally recognise the separatist provinces of Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea." There's your deal right there - and Zelensky should bite their hand off and he will.

Doing everything to help, short of helping

1000000% agree @Spekulatius The converse is true.........and Iran and North Korea et al are watching this closely...........building a nuclear capability IS the most important thing any tin pot dictator does on a daily basis with the resources of his country......

I'm afraid Ukraine has learned four very hard lessons: (1) Geography is destiny....you need to be a pragmatic when your a relatively small country book ended by two large powerful neighbors...having good relations with both is important & in fact a necessity (2) Be wary of the West with its promises of support for democracy & freedom in your country....they are always found wanting when the rubber hits the road & bullets start flying (unless your country is strategic to them) (3) Ukraine is strategically important for Russia (they've proved this) & not strategically important for the EU/NATO/USA (they've proved this) (4) International law sounds good until you really need....for the permanent members of the UN security council i.e. the Great powers......it effectively doesn't exist, only norms do...

Russia/Putin is not planning to invade Europe....if that was the plan yes he's made the job harder for himself........the aim of course was to make it so that Ukraine didnt become a NATO country on his doorstep.....Russia/Putin has been consistent on this since NATO Bucharest summit in 2008 (look it up)....you seem to imagine he has Pan-European aspirations....he doesnt.....he has Russian FIRST security & sovereignty in mind.....and NATO expansion into Ukraine was a threat to that. These have been his 'demands' since 2008 and immediately preceding the war, during the war and if he gets his demands at the end of the war......yes it called a victory......when you get exactly what you want. Independence is a very strong word for a country so destroyed by its neighbor, thats its neighbor tells it how to direct its sovereignty after the war i.e. forcing it to commit to not joining NATO. This is where it will end up now. I'm sure of it. You dont need to change the regime when you direct what it can or cant do. I'm afraid you're repeating Russian propaganda here - Russia's objectives re:Ukraine have been clear since 2008, what you listed here is the pretense that Putin used to begin the war. Even the USA government has called them that. The strategic objective clearly now was to (1) Teach Ukraine a lesson (2) Remind it the West wont spill a drop of its own blood to defend you, no matter what they say in Brussels or D.C. i.e. you are on your own against Russia and dont forget that again & (3) make it so Ukraine does not join NATO any time (4) Annex & formalize the annexation of the ethnically Russian regions of Crimea etc........which post the conclusion of this war will be officially integrated into Russia with Ukrainian consent under a binding international treaty Russia, as I explained previously @Viking, is a permanent member of the UN security council & the holder of the worlds largest nuclear warhead arsenal........it is not going away on the international scene or at the United Nations, nor is it wise for any right thinking politician to do so to make such a nation a pariah state and I expect a lot of pragmatism in the coming months as politicians play to the gallery while 're-integrating' Russia back into the global system. Germany will need its gas next winter.....no LNG terminal will be built that quickly......& the United States trust me wants more than anything else in its foreign policy dreams a stable situation in Eastern Europe vis a vis Russia such that it can pivot back to Asia where the real rising power with global ambitions is. This is the way I'm afraid. Your framework for thinking about this @Viking is idealistic and somewhat naive of the realpolitik of this whole situation. Like I mentioned above nation states don't have friends or enemies, they have only interests & as I've hoped I've outlined it is in the interests of the USA, UK, Germany, France etc. to return the situation in Eastern Europe back to lets call it 2007.....when no one ever dreamed possible that Ukraine could join NATO.

Let's see..............my prediction is that sanctions become defacto part of the peace negotiations.......and the big tickets ones for the Russian economy.....energy, swift access, frozen assets, BIS etc. etc. are either removed or scaled back so aggressively that they might as well not exist but will remain only to function as a fig leaf for Western politicians to hide behind when they suggest that sanctions remain because they are being 'tough' with Russia

Talk on 'the wires' that Ukraine & Russia peace talks are centering around Ukraine ceding effective control of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk to Russia AND committing to not joining NATO.......and in response to a peace deal 'the West' will, in the main, lift sanctions. I'm sorry if thats the deal where we end up, then Putin/Russia has "won"...........you can argue all day that it turned out to be harder than Putin thought or it didn't go well blah blah bah. If he gets these three things he has won.

The one reliable in international affairs is how unreliable 'partners' turn out to be or to paraphrase De Gaulle i think......Nations don't have friends or enemies, only interests !

My apologies at @Viking your correct on this. I'm both responding to you in my post but at the same time responding to a mixture of the message threads that are not yours. Conflating the two is imprecise and leaves ambiguity where I'm 'putting words in your mouth' so to speak. So totally agree on that & your right to call it out. Let's agree its too soon to call the war an unmitigated disaster for Russia, way too soon. For example do we know for certain the plan was to 'take Kiev' in three days? Nobody knows, so lets see. We also need to define what success would be for Russia in this, what are the strategic aims? Nobody knows for certain...but my opinion is that this was about NATO/EU encroachment and putting a stop to it. The question, which can only be answered after this war is over is the key one - in terms of whats left of Ukraine, is whats left more or less likely to be joining NATO/EU any time soon or not. If its more likely - Putin has lost. Less likely - Putin has won. My point also, not directed at you but impreccily landing near you - was that simply like Putin's media tells his people Russia is performing great in the war......our media tells us what we want to hear......that the side we back is doing really well. I'm not saying this is not true but what I'm saying is we should be always mindful of media in any form that tells us things we might like to hear. Especially in conflicts with tribal overtones - East vs. West, Democrats vs. Republicans, Liberals vs. Conservatives. Remember were just monkeys with guns and money. Agree the probability has risen........from impossible to basically impossible..........but also as per my line above........thinking about Putin err'ing and getting himself overthrown for 'messing' with the West pleases our tribal monkey brains such that we tell ourselves that. Its wishful thinking......which doesn't fully capture the reality that it remains highly highly unlikely an as I think Mearsheimar points out in some ways sanctions and ostracizing Russia stirs up feelings of nationalism and tribalism in Putin's own population....in some ways counter-acting whatever negatives might have led to his personal situation becoming more precarious. Yes but laws are made by men, & are imperfect & enforced by power & they can be ignored or twisted when suited & the truly great powers hold the veto.......as Russia does on the UN Security Council as a permanent member (the others are China, France,the United Kingdom, and the United States). Technically Russia can never be sanctioned under the internaitonal 'law' you referened which is really just the UN & whatever resolutions or sanctions it can pass to punish the 'guilty'.......see Russia has a veto......ergo it cannot be 'found guilty' under International by the only body that enforces this law because it sits on the jury with a veto. So you see how imperfect our "International law" law is.....and why I speak about the law of the jungle behind it? I think few people realize this - they think international law is like the law in their own country. You break it, your found guilty, your punished. Not so in international law. Yep you nailed - I had in mind other peoples threads earlier in the messages and should have been clearer on that I think what he's saying is that in some YES the great powers can do what they want, to an extent, but just not in other great powers spheres of influence such that they create existential fears for each other. The international system or rule of law exists but it is enforced by the great powers fundamentally and when it doesn't suit them they ignore it - because they hold a strange dual role as both policeman and perpetrator.......as I just outlined given the FIVE permanent member of the UN Security Council with VETO power. Russia, China, France,the United Kingdom, and the United States - depending on whats happening can be simultaneously the perpetrator, the policeman, the judge and jury. THIS is international law & you can see how imperfect it is and why the law of the jungle sits underneath. Yes it is - a man or country who hold the very destruction of the planet & human civilization at his fingertips has a power never wielded before in human history. Russia might be 50 -100 years behind the West economically but on this point there is no ambiguity - it is an 800ilb gorilla. I think what Mearsheimer means is that international law as we think of it is kind of fallacy and nebulous concept. Its made by great powers and enforced by consensus of great powers - as I've outlined above with its contradictory issues of veto power at UN etc...........this makes it so that right or wrong such that transgressions between Great powers can be punished by somebody doesn't exist in reality or practice for the permanent members of the UN secruity council ...............for example we all think on this board & agree that what Putin did was mortally wrong and breaks international law on sovereignty as written down........SO if thats the case @Viking.......show me the charges & the guilty verdict handed down by the only arbiter of international law that exists today in the International law system - the UN? There isn't one because the Great Powers have made it so that they can never be truly "found guilty" by the enforcement body of that the law, the UN. So you can see - might equals right...........in the sense that the mighty (the FIVE) can never be found 'wrong' under international law as constructed today.

I somewhat agree - however what differentiates Russia from say Cuba/Iran/North Korea.....is what I referenced above, its place at the very top of the 'Great Power' table vis-à-vis its nuclear capability.........its not good risk management to leave a country with 6,000+ ballistic nuclear warheads so economically backed into a corner forever as it is now....& effectively barred from the international system (SWIFT / BIS etc.). To do so, I'm afraid, would be a mistake that would endanger us ALL over the long run and THIS above all else should be avoided at all costs. I don't like it one bit, but this is the reality and I hope the politicians are wise enough to know this........or put another way if Twitter polls decided world affairs I'm certain the human race would have been obliterated already by a thermonuclear catastrophe. Let's hope the politicians turn off Twitter, CNN, Instagram, Fox & focus groups when the real decisions need to be made.

@Viking I think in this discussion & in your comments above.....there is lots of idealism & wishful thinking (Russia losing war / Putin to be overthrown), the ideal Ukrainian soverignity & self-determintion, there is also element of tribalism...in that everything 'we' do is good, what 'they' do is bad. Perhaps personally I have fierce contrarian bias that clouds my thinking too that acknowledge. Below is a clip from a recent interview with John Mearsheimer......and his assessment chimes with my read of the situation...its pragmatic with not a shred of idealism.. ....I think his thinking is well reasoned & what we should all aspire to, as investors/thinkers, which is a detached realistic assessment of reality, based on historic evidence (sanctions) & game theory with an overlay of how in reality flimsy international "law" is in certain circumstances. And for a definition of 'great power'........even in a declining state like Russia, with a tiny GDP & not that technologically advanced......the only requirement in our world to get into that great power group is to have pretty much any ballistic nuclear capability......and then a special place is reserved a the top of the great power group for those with a balisitic nuclear capability that can destroy the whole world (this group includes only two member the USA (5,500 warheads) & Russia (6257 warheads) with China way below with only 350 warheads. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons Like it or not Russia is great power........Putin/Russia literally controls the destruction of the whole planet & human race at his fingertips. When you strip away "society" and "law" there exists an undeniable third pillar of life.......the law of the jungle which sits below everything.....or as Mearsheimer says in the clip below "might equals right". It's not comforting to acknowledge this but it is the reality.

1000000% agree, it was beyond stupid to not leave this option on the table....such that the potential costs would be raised as Putin weighed up what to do next. Biden PR's gurus in the background must have told him that with Afghanistan still looming large in focus group discussions.....having an ambiguous position on troops in Ukraine would not "play well" at the Mid-terms........well look whats happened now the Democrats are going to be destroyed at polls with energy prices ramping up & inflation prints about to get worse (when without this war they were likely going to get better)

Just want to be clear, lest some of my comments earlier in this thread came across as some kind absolution of Russian responsibility or agency here. Russia is the aggressor and transgressor of international norms and laws here. They say war is the failure of politics & 'they' are right.....to get to this point and then simply layer on a victim & the perpetrator narrative is not to understand how we got here but also more importantly, for an investing forum, trying to predict the future..........how this will end.

Final thought on the motives of Europe here............is that I can almost hear the whispered voices of the diplomats & beaucrats in the Brussels......."God I wish it could just go back to the way it was, we shouldn't have encouraged Ukraine to become so Western, what we were thinking, we like peace on the continent why did we let the American's meddle on our doorstep we've seen what they do in other regions of the world. We should have told them to back the fuck away from American interventionism & tokenism in Ukraine" My prediction is the EU & Russia will get to do the time warp......Russia will withdraw from Ukraine in exchange for the majority of sanctions being lifted and they'll figure out a way to go back to 2007......when the idea of Ukrainian accession to NATO was just not even imagined as possible.

I've explained a couple of times now - its not in support of Ukraine.......don't you see its to protect the EU/NATO, cause it now feels threatened that Russia is now officially at its door step? See Europe liked Ukraine as a buffer too and its being reminded of that now. To support Ukraine would be to go fight there.

I think you missed my earlier point @Viking.......which was to point out that the EU27's reaction to this is not surprising at all, you seem impressed & surprised by the coordination & solidarity.......and I'm simply explaining the fact that when a buffer state like Ukraine that sits between two opposing factions (the West & Russia) becomes not a buffer state.......which by the way can happen either through MILITARY intervention or POLITICAL intervention......one faction on either side shits its pants.......so i just neatly explained two things......Why Russia Invaded Ukraine while ALSO explaining the EU27's solidarity that your surprised by and reading hell of alot into without considering the obvious which is the EU/NATO feels threatened ITSELF by Ukraine not being the buffer they thought it was. The EU/NATO couldn't give a shit about Ukraine, if they did they would be there fighting right now.

Sorry you posted while i was writing the below - Europe's response to Ukraine should not be seen in the context of supporting Ukraine.....it should be seen in the context of blind self interest.......if they cared about Ukraine they'd go fight there......they aren't, not a drop of blood has been spilt by the EU27, because they don't really care............what they care about is the even dim prospect that Putin would continue on past Ukraine into Poland etc. THIS is what Europe is reacting to and why the solidarity was found to come together. 1 hour ago, Viking said: Yep its amazing when a country/bloc feels an existential threat isn't how they'll react, so I'm not that amazed on the solidarity of the Europeans????Existential threats get reactions....Cuban Missle crisis?........& I dunno like NATO/EU/USA encroaching into Ukraine set off existential threat thoughts in Russia.....well mind fuck guys.....Putin just did to the Europeans/NATO/USA what they had been doing to him for the last 10 years......Putin/Russia encroached into Ukraine and made it not neutral and not a buffer state.....and the West literally shit its pants and managed to rally together on sanctions etc................so...............how does everybody stop wearing adult diapers in the West and in Russia?............well Ukraine goes back to being a buffer state again and everybody behind closed doors agrees it was madness to ever get into a tangle ever again over Ukraine.

Yep @Gregmal & I put my money where my mouth/opinion is/was and pulled the trigger yesterday/this morning Cant believe I got to buy MSGE in the low 70's again (unless they have a Sphere planned in Moscow that I wasn't aware of ).......and Hostelworld (HSW) in the late 0.60's....bargain

The assumption in everyones thinking here is that this 'invasion' is going to go on for a long time. I dont think it will by the time extreme extreme sanction pain begins to flow through to the Russian economy i predict the war will be for all intensive purposes over. Given this thread is called "end game". I'll posit my end game again which is becoming more and more likely IMO. Russia has already moved to what I indicated they would which is aerial bombardment, Russian troops were used simply to begin the invasion and precipitate the flee'ing of civilians from key Ukrainian cities...this is not an occupying force (number of Russian troops is too small for that)....Ukraine's main cities will be destroyed in the next couple of weeks with shelling, missiles etc. Once enough damage is inflicted such that Ukraine will be crippled for a decade, Putin will then begin 'de-escalation talks' but really they will be an exercise in diplomacy theatre whereby Putin dismantles the sanctions regime in exchange for various de-escalation milestones he was planning to do anyway. The Western media & politicians of course will claim its because of the Ukrainian army with western equipment being so formidable or military incompetence on the part of Russia or indeed domestic political issues related to sanctions. The EU/NATO/USA will declare it as victory of Western solidarity, democracy & freedom in the face of a tyrant dictator. Whatever in Putin's mind, he controls his domestic media & he'll tell them that Russia achieved its aim of restoring Ukrainian neutrality and on the balance of probabilities he'll be right & the West deluded.

Money YES........EU/NATO membership not a chance in hell or in my lifetime now......this is the point of the invasion (demolition). Think about this: Question : What has the EU/NATO/USA learned about Ukraine from this crisis? Answer: (1) That Russia cares ALOT about Ukraine remaining a neutral buffer state, that Putin/Russia views NATO/EU/USA encroachment into Ukraine as an existential crisis (ala Cuban Missle crisis) and is willing to spend blood, bullets & suffer severe economic damage to stop that happening. (2) The EU/NATO/USA has learned a lesson too about its self - that it thought it cared about Ukraine but has discovered that it cares not enough to spend a single drop of blood defending it. (3) Russia, has reminded the West, that it may be declining state but nonetheless a thermonuclear one. (4) The United States, has been reminded, that meddling in Ukraine and enraging a thermonuclear power like Russia is both futile (cause the US has no intention of ever defending Ukraine because it isn't strategically important to US foreign policy) and that its wasting time/resources & mental overhead when the real threat to American sovereignty & security is in Asia with China, not Eastern Europe & the husk of the USSR called Russia. (5) Geopolitical battles by sovereign thermonuclear nations in foreign territories where that country/territory is NOT strategically important to that power are usually decided by one factor and one factor alone - RESOLVE - or put another way who cares more......for example Afghanistan......not strategically important to the United States - who cared more about controlling Afghanistan : the United States or the Taliban? Who had the greater resolve? We got the answer.....and history is littered with these. OK who has the greater resolve in Ukraine????? - Russia or the EU/NATO/USA? Is Ukraine strategically important to the EU/NATO/USA? is it strategically important to Russia? Answer - Russia clearly has the greater resolve here and the EU/NATO/USA has been reminded it doesn't. Coming out of this crisis it would be politically stupid for the EU/NATO to make overtures again to Ukrainian accession.....build it up economically sure but the EU/NATO will realize that Ukraine needs to remain neutral (for all the reasons i listed above) and a realistic Ukrainian political/economic aspiration after this war is over , should be to become the Switzerland of the Eastern Europe (not an EU/NATO member, this is dumb as we've found out). (6) What has Ukraine learned??..........that geography is destiny......for 24 million Ukrainian to prosper it needs to have good relations with the EU/NATO/USA AND Russia simultaneously. This is Ukrania's lot in life, the cards it was dealt at birth.....wise political leaders play the hand they're dealt, not the cards they wish they had.

Putin’s Endgame Starts to Look Like Reducing Ukraine to Rubble https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-09/vladimir-putin-s-ukraine-invasion-stares-down-brutal-endgame?srnd=premium&sref=7zqHEcxJ As I mentioned many posts above this is not an invasion and occupation happening in Ukraine right now............this is a demolition crew sent to level Ukraine such that it will be no fit partner for anyone EU/NATO/USA for decades and by extension its buffer state status (& Russian security) will be restored.

The Russian’s & their missiles will mainly be in the air soon…..there won’t be any of them to kill on the ground in Kiev/insert Ukrainian city…..just a relentless barrage from above from things you can’t see and people you can’t shoot at. This is the Russian way.

Russian demands are consistent with their red lines communicated to NATO/EU/UN/USA immediately prior to the invasion & for the last decade. You have listed the demands well, by order of importance I would argue. They have IMO already in many ways achieved objective No.1, yes better if it gets put in a constitution - but Ukraine is the hot stove that the child (NATO/EU/USA) will never touch again now that its been so badly burned. Crimea/Donetsk/Luhansk........some power sharing, regional autonomy fudge can be created for these.

+1 as above Ukraine though will be wrecked first by aerial bombardment such that its hobbled for a generation.....the price has already been paid by Putin...... sanctions, international condemnation.......logic dictates that Russia's full objectives now need to be completed & Putin will swiftly move to aerial bombardment, decide on a level of destruction he deems appropriate......& then come to the negotiating table to participate in diplomacy theatre where each sanction lifted is traded for some Russian de-escalation (that they would have done anyway cause they have no intention of staying). Macron/Biden will eat up every hollow diplomatic 'victory' as a sign of their 'strength' and 'statesmanship', cause they need it for their own domestic audiences but in reality they'll realize Putin is throwing them bones. He did what he wanted to do and nobody stood up to him.