Russia-Ukrainian War

[no_free_lunch]

 

The link and excerpts are a transcription from RIA Novosti a Russia news agency.  I'm curious if any Russian speakers can validate the original article.

 

 

The special operation revealed that not only the political leadership in Ukraine is Nazi, but also the majority of the population. All Ukrainians who have taken up arms must be eliminated - because they are responsible for the genocide of the Russian people.

 

Denazification means de-Ukrainianisation. Ukrainians are an artificial anti-Russian construct. They should no longer have a national identity. Denazification of Ukraine also means its inevitable de-Europeanisation. 

 

Ukraine's political elite must be eliminated as it cannot be re-educated. Ordinary Ukrainians must experience all the horrors of war and absorb the experience as a historical lesson and atonement for their guilt. 

 

The liberated and denazified territory of the Ukrainian state should no longer be called Ukraine. Denazification should last at least one generation - 25 years. Then the author goes on to detail exactly what needs to be done

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1510908227202002947

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by no_free_lunch

[lnofeisone]

1 hour ago, no_free_lunch said:

 

The link and excerpts are a transcription from RIA Novosti a Russia news agency.  I'm curious if any Russian speakers can validate the original article.

https://mobile.twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1510908227202002947

 

Validated. The twitter translation is on point as well. 

 

Few thing to note about the article - it's an OpEd. The author - Timofei Sergeytsev - is a blend of a Tucker Carlson and a political consultant (that lead political campaigns for Russian politicians). He is a known Russian nationalist who sees everything as Russophobia and an ardent anti-Ukrainian. He  wrote a movie - which has a feel of a pro-Russian propaganda - called "Match" that depicted Ukrainians in a particularly terrible light (making them out to be responsible for Baby Yar, etc.).

[Blugolds11]

Can someone help me understand the significance of labeling Putin a war criminal and the activities war crimes or crimes against humanity? 

 

How does that change things? The reluctance/caution by some to label Putin or behavior as such? I dont get it. I dont think Putin cares what anybody calls him. And as far as I understand the world is doing what it can with sanctions etc already...you cant remove them from SWIFT banking any more than you already have, other means of trade etc. What more could be done due to the new classification? China will still trade with Russia etc the countries that are still supporting or not condemning Russian aggression will continue to do so regardless of the label. 

 

Say he is labeled as such and ordered to report to the international courts for trial...do you think he would actually go? The man has everything he could ever want inside his own boarders...and the population has their hands tied, and evidently many support him, so do you think it will really make a difference to change anything? 

 

I just dont see much changing regardless of the label, yet see it plastered all over media (both sides) from various countries...regardless of what you call it, the acts are there for everyone to see, the terminology IMO is inconsequential. 

[lnofeisone]

41 minutes ago, Blugolds11 said:

Can someone help me understand the significance of labeling Putin a war criminal and the activities war crimes or crimes against humanity? 

 

How does that change things? The reluctance/caution by some to label Putin or behavior as such? I dont get it. I dont think Putin cares what anybody calls him.

Lots of layers on this onion. If he is charged as a war criminal, there will be an arrest warrant for him and Putin would need to be brought to Hague as ICC doesn't try in abstentia. 

Why do it:  It removes his next step if he were to lose or give up his power. His choice of where to go into exile (or even travel) will diminish substantially. This is tricky as it incentivizes Putin to stay in power.

 

Why avoid it:

1) Arresting the leader of a nuclear power is unpredictable and can get violent. Is the world ready for that?

2) Not everyone tried by the ICC was found guilty. Imagine the signal to the world should he be found not guilty.

 

Neither Russia nor Ukraine are members of the ICC. Ukraine will probably consent to ICC's jurisdiction but Russia doesn't have to recognize ICC tribunal or cooperate (which they won't as long as Putin is in power). Long way of saying, this will be long and messy and results are far from guaranteed. 

[Spekulatius]

9 hours ago, lnofeisone said:

Lots of layers on this onion. If he is charged as a war criminal, there will be an arrest warrant for him and Putin would need to be brought to Hague as ICC doesn't try in abstentia. 

Why do it:  It removes his next step if he were to lose or give up his power. His choice of where to go into exile (or even travel) will diminish substantially. This is tricky as it incentivizes Putin to stay in power.

 

Why avoid it:

1) Arresting the leader of a nuclear power is unpredictable and can get violent. Is the world ready for that?

2) Not everyone tried by the ICC was found guilty. Imagine the signal to the world should he be found not guilty.

 

Neither Russia nor Ukraine are members of the ICC. Ukraine will probably consent to ICC's jurisdiction but Russia doesn't have to recognize ICC tribunal or cooperate (which they won't as long as Putin is in power). Long way of saying, this will be long and messy and results are far from guaranteed. 

This also sent a signal to those that work with him and are involved in the war crimes as well. We do not know the exact inner workings, but each crime has more than person involved.  I think starting this is the right thing to do, but there are going to be way more people implicated than just Putin.

 

As for the War crimes Bucha, one should keep in mind that this is probably not just Putin's work. To me, it looks very much like the army of 2022 looks like the Russian army of WW2. The Russian army of WW2 did their fair share of raping, plundering and and random killing of civilians back then (my maternal family was on the receiving end of it in Berlin 1945). Probably more understandable given the circumstances back then, but again remember the army was told they are going on a de-nazification campaign in Ukraine.

 

So what we are seeing here is a pattern of the Russian army that precedes Putin.

[Spekulatius]

I like the (almost daily)  reports from Michael Clark) on Sky news. Very concise and clear:

Russia is going to move their focus to the South East and try a breakthrough. I think before this either succeeds or fails, all negotiations are moot, nothing will happen.

[no_free_lunch]

On the war crimes trials , I tend to agree that it's pointless and perhaps worse than that. It seems it gives a false sense of control to the west and a false sense of action.  To reiterate there is no ability to try Putin and company so let's not play games.  This does not count as doing anything against Russia or for the victims in Bucha and elsewhere.  I would rather government focus on helping Ukraine militarily and via sanctions.

Edited April 5, 2022 by no_free_lunch

[wristband]

Yes, to echo Spek's compliment...Michael Clark's analysis on Sky News is well worth seeking out.  You can access Sky for free on Pluto (available through streaming platforms and devices like YouTube TV or Roku).  Plus, Sky's reporters on site are very good and well informed.

 

They lack/avoid the rapid fire pace of US networks which allot 30-45 seconds to a "live" report alongside superficial analyses by generalists (pun intended). 

 

[SharperDingaan]

The war crime thing enables possibilities

When Putin doesn't show It generates an international arrest warrant. It also generates a UN prosecution, and humanitarian possibilities, that can be enforced by UN members and not NATO.

 

Everything from an extraction of Putin himself, through to 'enforced' evacuation routes; by land, air, and sea.

Blue helmets shepherding people out under protection of the participating UN armed forces; fire on them, and you lose your artillery &/or missile launch sites. 

 

SD

[CGJB]

End game?

 

At a minimum, the two breakaway Donbass Republics will provide Russia with a land bridge to Crimea. They may even become part of Russia at some point. No way is Ukraine ever getting them or Crimea back.

[Spekulatius]

32 minutes ago, CGJB said:

End game?

 

At a minimum, the two breakaway Donbass Republics will provide Russia with a land bridge to Crimea. They may even become part of Russia at some point. No way is Ukraine ever getting them or Crimea back.

Donbas is not a given for Putin. If it comes to a point where the people there can vote on this, overseen by the UN,  I think they would vote to remain in Ukraine. It all depends on how the next stage of the war turns out.

Crimean likely remains Russian, no matter what.

[Spekulatius]

So it looks like Finland may well join NATO , as was contemplated here. Sweden is much more hesitant, which is explainable given their location (no land borders with Russia).

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/why-putin-faces-more-nato-arctic-after-ukraine-invasion-2022-04-04/

 

 

• Summary

• Finnish President asked NATO chief how to join; Sweden more hesitant
• NATO sees both countries as partners
• Living memories of war kept Finns on alert, Swedes less prepared
• Finnish politicians tour NATO capitals to gauge support
• Moscow has threatened "serious consequences" if countries join

BARDUFOSS, Norway, April 4 (Reuters) - The sound of gunfire echoed around the Norwegian fjords as a row of Swedish and Finnish soldiers, positioned prone behind banks of snow, trained rifles and missile launchers on nearby hills ready for an enemy attack.

The drill, in March, was the first time forces from Finland and Sweden have formed a combined brigade in a scheduled NATO exercise in Arctic Norway known as "Cold Response." Neither country is a member of the NATO alliance. The exercise was long planned, but Russia's invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24 added intensity to the war game.

 

This short video has more information

This advertiser wants to share their trending video

AD BY SPONSOR 

 

See More

 

 

Report ad

"We would be rather naive not to recognise that there is a threat," Swedish Major Stefan Nordstrom told Reuters. "The security situation in the whole of Europe has changed and we have to accept that, and we have to adapt."

That sense of threat means President Vladimir Putin, who embarked on what he calls a "special operation" in Ukraine partly to counter the expansion of the NATO alliance, may soon have a new NATO neighbour.

Report ad

Finland has a 1,300 km (810 mile) border with Russia. In a March 28 phone call, the country's President Sauli Niinisto asked NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg for details on principles and steps for accepting new members, he wrote on Facebook. Finland's leaders have discussed possible membership with "almost all" NATO's 30 members, and will submit a review to parliament by mid-April, Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto told Reuters.

[lnofeisone]

Interesting read - https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/ukraine/2022/04/russia-cannot-afford-to-lose-so-we-need-a-kind-of-a-victory-sergey-karaganov-on-what-putin-wants

 

Aformer presidential adviser to both Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin, Sergey Karaganov is honorary chair of the Moscow think tank the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy. He is associated with a number of key ideas in Russian foreign policy, from the so-called Karaganov doctrine on the rights of ethnic Russians living abroad to the principle of “constructive destruction”, also known as the “Putin doctrine”. Karaganov is close to both Putin and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, and he formulated many of the ideas that led to the war in Ukraine – though he has also expressed disagreement with the idea of a long-term occupation of the country.

[Spekulatius]

33 minutes ago, lnofeisone said:

Interesting read - https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/ukraine/2022/04/russia-cannot-afford-to-lose-so-we-need-a-kind-of-a-victory-sergey-karaganov-on-what-putin-wants

 

Aformer presidential adviser to both Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin, Sergey Karaganov is honorary chair of the Moscow think tank the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy. He is associated with a number of key ideas in Russian foreign policy, from the so-called Karaganov doctrine on the rights of ethnic Russians living abroad to the principle of “constructive destruction”, also known as the “Putin doctrine”. Karaganov is close to both Putin and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, and he formulated many of the ideas that led to the war in Ukraine – though he has also expressed disagreement with the idea of a long-term occupation of the country.

This guy seems delusional. Just because you need a victory doesn’t need doesn’t mean you get one. NATO Article 5 isn’t worthless either, hopefully they don’t think so at the Kremlin.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Spekulatius

[lnofeisone]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

This guy seems delusional. Just because you need a victory doesn’t need doesn’t mean you get one. NATO Article 5 isn’t worthless either, hopefully they don’t think so at the Kremlin.

Scary to think that these guys Putin's advisors and the damage that they can inflict as a result. 

[Dinar]

37 minutes ago, lnofeisone said:

Scary to think that these guys Putin's advisors and the damage that they can inflict as a result. 

I think that what he is trying to say is that Putin needs to declare a victory.  Whether that is truly a victory or defeat is another matter.  Essentially Putin needs to save face.  At least that is my reading.  May be I am wrong.

[Ulti]

https://octavian.substack.com/p/the-bear-breaks-down-andrei-soldatov?s=r

 

 

 

[Spekulatius]

9 hours ago, Dinar said:

I think that what he is trying to say is that Putin needs to declare a victory.  Whether that is truly a victory or defeat is another matter.  Essentially Putin needs to save face.  At least that is my reading.  May be I am wrong.

Well, but that's Putin's problem and he has his Propaganda machinery to turn pretty much everything into a "victory".

[Spekulatius]

46 minutes ago, Ulti said:

https://octavian.substack.com/p/the-bear-breaks-down-andrei-soldatov?s=r

 

 

 

Pretty good article. Thanks for posting.

[Ulti]

Spek,

I would be interested to know what you think ;but after reading this and reading \watching Howard Marks:

 

The pendulum has swung back to safe and secure.

Putin will be in power for a long time (unless health ).

Comm.and energy will be at elevated levels for a long time.

Its a very long road for green energy.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-solar-expansion-stalled-by-rural-land-use-protests-2022-04-07/

[Ulti]

 

[SharperDingaan]

Re solar expansion.

The issue isn't solar, it is the US approach being advocated. Build a massive green field farm in the middle of nowhere, ship the power out, and hope that nobody bitches. Bribes/lobbying will ensure that most of these will get built, but obviously, management is pretty clueless. 

 

In rural areas solar is more about the farmer putting panels on their land, selling the excess power to the grid, and taxpayers providing financing. Farmers save the cash cost of their monthly electric bill, plus get a little additional cash on  top. The more organic, and the more take up, the more excess power there is.

 

In urban areas it is more about roof top and glass curtain panels. Rooftop panels supplying the home, and excess power going to local grids. Condo/office blocks replacing portions of existing curtain wall, to supply most of the internal need.

 

SD

[benchmark]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/09/business/dealbook/09db-browder-russia-santions.html

 

Bill Browder's view is that this is likely going to drag on for a long time.

[boilermaker75]

On 4/7/2022 at 10:35 AM, SharperDingaan said:

Re solar expansion.

The issue isn't solar, it is the US approach being advocated. Build a massive green field farm in the middle of nowhere, ship the power out, and hope that nobody bitches. Bribes/lobbying will ensure that most of these will get built, but obviously, management is pretty clueless. 

 

In rural areas solar is more about the farmer putting panels on their land, selling the excess power to the grid, and taxpayers providing financing. Farmers save the cash cost of their monthly electric bill, plus get a little additional cash on  top. The more organic, and the more take up, the more excess power there is.

 

In urban areas it is more about roof top and glass curtain panels. Rooftop panels supplying the home, and excess power going to local grids. Condo/office blocks replacing portions of existing curtain wall, to supply most of the internal need.

 

SD

 

I think the distributed sources of generation make the most sense. 

 

You could build massive solar sites in Nevada, but you would need to install a DC transmission system to ship the power to all parts of the US. I worry that such a system would be very vulnerable and it would be easy to shut down the nation’s whole power system. Plus much more expensive as you point out.

Edited April 11, 2022 by boilermaker75

[Ulti]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/julia-ioffe-on-putins-road-to-war/id1277250997?i=1000553721801