Russia-Ukrainian War

[Spekulatius]

45 minutes ago, JAK said:

And on top of that you have the complication of Turkey, a NATO country, actively helping Azerbaijan... Not sure the West wants to go there given Erdogan is trying to distract the unhappy populace by reopening border disputes with Greece (another NATO member), and also has the ability to threatening Europe with refugees. Although I agree the West seems to be unfairly ignoring it. 

Turkey is a NATO ally, but what they are doing with Azerbaijan is not sanctioned by the NATO, its Erdogan going it alone because of Turkey's local interests. Same in Syria and the Kurdistan conflict.

 

Armenia aligned themselves with Russia, perhaps because they felt they had no choice. That means that no help from NATO will be forthcoming however (imagine giving Armenia weapons and they end up being used by Russia in Ukraine?).

 

So this is one of those regional conflicts (there are literally dozens in the world) that are getting fought on and off. According to Putin's thinking, Ukraine should have played out the same way but it did not turn out that way.

 

I also agree with @Xerxes that Zeihan has the Russian Iran relationship wrong. I have paid a little more attention to his youtube videos and while he is pretty good at identifying trends (his specialty are interactions  of demographics/ geography and history) he seems to often paint too broad of a brush and get's nuances wrong, imo.

[shhughes1116]

On 9/11/2022 at 10:23 AM, changegonnacome said:

Yep curious for @shhughes1116 latest take on things….is this a true turning point and what options does Putin have remaining to him now?

 

Yes.  I believe this is a turning point in the war.  As I previously described, the trajectory of manpower for Ukraine is up, and the trajectory of manpower for Russia is down, and this gap is widening.  Each passing day sees more combat-ready Ukrainian troops and fewer combat-ready Russian and Russian proxy troops.  Ukraine is rotating front-line units, and has been doing that for 45-60 days now.  That gives you a sense for how they see their manpower situation along the front.  

 

Five observations about the battlefield:

1.  There are 10k Ukrainian combat troops - a little more than 2 maneuver brigades - that are being trained in the UK.  Their training is coming to an end and will return to Ukraine soon.    

2.  By my estimation, the Ukrainians have another 2-3 maneuver brigades - 12k-18k - that are in Ukraine, have been equipped and trained, but not deployed to the front-lines.  These maneuver brigades probably became a lot more mobile with all of the mechanized equipment captured during the recent Krakiv counter-offensive.  

3. The more capable Russian combat units were re-deployed to Kherson.  They have been fixed there by the Ukrainian's slow-moving, methodical counter-attack.  Because the bridges have been destroyed or heavily damaged, they are unable to be effectively re-supplied, and they are unable to retreat with their heavy equipment.  The troops that would have defended Crimea are instead fighting in Kherson.  They are on the wrong side of the river. 

4. Along the Donbas, the Russians are bleeding themselves dry near/around Bakhmut.  This appears to be the last area where they have the strength to carry out offensive operations.    

5. Winter is coming, and with that, offensive operations will slow.  Maybe another 45 days before the weather starts slowing down operations in Ukraine.     

 

So what are Putin's options?  

 

Realistically, he does not have any non-nuclear options.  

1.   "Hold the line" in Ukraine.  But, the Russian's don't have enough troops to defend the Donbas front, the Zaporizhzhia front, and the Kherson front.  They are vulnerable in each of these places, and Ukraine can pick and choose which area to exploit.  And by my estimation, the Ukrainians have the American equivalent of an overstrength armored Division waiting in reserve, perfect for exploiting a deep breakthrough in any of these three fronts. 

2.  "Conquer more land in Ukraine in order to force Kyiv to capitulate"  The Russians don't have enough troops to force a breakthrough on any of these three fronts. 

3.  "Mobilize for a holy war in Ukraine." If he calls for a general mobilization, I think he likely gets f**ked by a general uprising.

4. "Claim that de-nazification was successful and retreat/leave."  If he leaves/retreats, I think he get's f**ked by the even more extreme Russian nationalists/fascists. 

5.  "Blackmail Europeans with nat gas."  Putin hopes for an apocalyptic winter in Europe, and hopes gas prices blow through the roof, forcing European governments to make nice with Russia and stop arming Ukraine.  Hope is not a valid investment strategy, and is definitely not a valid military strategy.     

6.  "Go nuclear."  Claim that Russian's territory is threatened by Ukrainian attacks on Donestsk and Luhansk, and utilize multiple tactical nukes in Ukraine.  

 

I think 1-4 are unlikely. 

 

I think Putin will hope for #5, but this won't be successful because he underestimates the resolve of European governments to support Ukraine.    

 

That leaves Putin with #6 - tactical nukes.  I believe Putin will try to use tactical nukes in Ukraine because he believes NATO will not react to this.  I don't know what would prevent this from happening. 

- Historically a lone rational actor in the Russian Armed Forces has prevented nuclear escalation, but this is a very different situation from those historical precedents. 

- Given how Ukraine has acquitted themselves in this war, the West could secretly arm Ukraine will multiple nuclear weapons, and tell Putin that Ukraine will be given the green-light to use these nuclear weapons in response to any nuclear provocation from Russia.  but this would open Pandora's box for future nuclear proliferation.  

 

If Putin does not use tactical nukes, then I think Ukraine defeats the Russians on the battlefield while Putin watches helplessly.    

[changegonnacome]

@shhughes1116 really appreciate you taking the time to outline your thoughts

 

Seems like there may be an emerging window coming up where negotiations have a shot at success & where everybody has an off-ramp which allows some victory to be claimed.....Ukraine, for the first time in the war, is on the front foot they can come to a peace deal from a position of strength & claim a 'win'.......Russia is not yet fully humiliated (but possibly is on the pathway to being) and perhaps some de-nazification 'win' could be claimed now to allow a ceasing of the 'special operation'........this winter is also the last where Russia has so much leverage over Europe. Best to use that leverage now before its gone and get some sanctions peeled off in exchange for a structured with-drawl. If things progress much further as you've outlined Russia/Putin will become increasingly humiliated and the possible off ramps for them start to twindle. 

 

Very curious to see how this plays.....it hinges, as it has for a long, on wether Putin is a rational actor or one who's mind has been turned to swiss cheese through dreams of an old Russian empire that doesnt exisit anymore except in the paintings that hang in Kremlin.

[Spekulatius]

17 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

@shhughes1116 really appreciate you taking the time to outline your thoughts

 

Seems like there may be an emerging window coming up where negotiations have a shot at success & where everybody has an off-ramp which allows some victory to be claimed.....Ukraine, for the first time in the war, is on the front foot they can come to a peace deal from a position of strength & claim a 'win'.......Russia is not yet fully humiliated (but possibly is on the pathway to being) and perhaps some de-nazification 'win' could be claimed now to allow a ceasing of the 'special operation'........this winter is also the last where Russia has so much leverage over Europe. Best to use that leverage now before its gone and get some sanctions peeled off in exchange for a structured with-drawl. If things progress much further as you've outlined Russia/Putin will become increasingly humiliated and the possible off ramps for them start to twindle. 

 

Very curious to see how this plays.....it hinges, as it has for a long, on wether Putin is a rational actor or one who's mind has been turned to swiss cheese through dreams of an old Russian empire that doesnt exisit anymore except in the paintings that hang in Kremlin.

I think negotiations are at this point are unlikely to lead to anything. There is no willingness from either side to negotiate.

 

Both Putin and Zelensky stated this very recently.

[changegonnacome]

9 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

I think negotiations are at this point are unlikely to lead to anything. There is no willingness from either side to negotiate.

 

Which is a shame......seems to me that there is window now.......where both might be able to leave the negotiating table with a narrative that vaguely works domestically/internationally. 

 

Frankly as I've outlined before....I'm interested and supportive of Ukrainian sovereignty.....but what motivates my thinking chiefly is how to minimize, even the slightest hint of a possibility of nuclear escalation.

 

Proxy wars in far flung jurisdictions not neighboring a nuclear power are one thing......but to bring a proxy war to a nuclear powers doorstep is quite another.

[Gregmal]

Machismo and war tend to go hand in hand. Whomever thinks theyre winning typically thinks they'll win. Same with sports. Its why the top investment firms often looks for athletes from the top universities to hire. 

[shhughes1116]

40 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Which is a shame......seems to me that there is window now.......where both might be able to leave the negotiating table with a narrative that vaguely works domestically/internationally.

People keep suggesting that negotiation is possible with Putin.  It is not.  For Putin, negotiations and cease fires are simply an opportunity to re-arm and re-position combat units for the next round of war.  
 

The Russians and their collaborators are panicking.  They’ve hastily called for referenda between Sept 23 and Sept 27, and the Duma is bringing back Stalin-esque laws, such as criminalizing the act of surrendering with a 10-year prison sentence.  
 

if I was a betting man, we are going to see the Ukrainians blow a hole in the Russian line in Zaporizhzhia that is timed to coincide with the referendum.  Head south to Mauiopil and Melitpol, and then wheel west towards Crimea.  This makes the Russian positions in Kherson untenable, and opens the door to Crimea.  The Russian collaborators will have to choose between running a sham referendum or fleeing to save their lives.   

 

[lnofeisone]

Looks like option 1 that @shhughes1116 provided is up next. Putin is calling for partial mobilization of conscripts. Conscripts can't serve in non-Russian territories so looks like the next play Putin is going with is referendums to proclaim legitimacy of the three regions in eastern Ukraine and pouring 300k troops on top of what's there now. 

 

Looks Putin and Shoigu by extension are carefully maneuvering this one. Lots of incentives for the 300k to show up (regular army benefits, etc.). They are calling up logistics experts and experienced troops first and actually giving them more than a week of training. Regular army contracts are extended "for as long as conscripts are in service." With cold a month away, this will very likely be "hold the line" exercise with opportunistic strikes on both sides. 

[shhughes1116]

1 hour ago, lnofeisone said:

Looks like option 1 that @shhughes1116 provided is up next. Putin is calling for partial mobilization of conscripts. Conscripts can't serve in non-Russian territories so looks like the next play Putin is going with is referendums to proclaim legitimacy of the three regions in eastern Ukraine and pouring 300k troops on top of what's there now. 

 

Looks Putin and Shoigu by extension are carefully maneuvering this one. Lots of incentives for the 300k to show up (regular army benefits, etc.). They are calling up logistics experts and experienced troops first and actually giving them more than a week of training. Regular army contracts are extended "for as long as conscripts are in service." With cold a month away, this will very likely be "hold the line" exercise with opportunistic strikes on both sides. 

Remember that what they say publicly is usually different from what happens behind the scenes, especially as it relates to training in the military.  The folks mobilized will not receive more than a week of training.  They will be lucky to receive any real training.  Much of the training cadre was deployed to Ukraine already, and historically most of the training funding has been siphoned away through corruption - recruits are lucky if they even get to fire their weapon before deployment.  
 

if you thought you saw canon fodder over the last six months, this will be worse.  Think of the opening scene to the move Stalingrad.  “Rifle for you, ammunition for you.  When the man in front drops the rifle, the man in back picks up the rifle.”  That’s the approach they are using. 

[Xerxes]

If a democratically elected leader (LBJ) of a major Western power couldn’t come down his high horses and find a way to end Vietnam, I don’t understand why people in this thread think that the gangsters running Kremlin are not going to double down. 
 

There can be no strategic pause for Kiev. As they can re-arm at a much faster than Moscow can, thanks to the Western inflow of war material. Russian Motherland and the regime are not at any existential risk thanks to the nukes and the internal controls and incentives built over decades and the Rubicon has already been crossed on Western sanctions. So no incremental gain there for Kremlin to play nice. Zelensky is no fool. He already know all this.  
 

That said countries like Turkey can play a role here as mediator over time. But a mediator cannot see things in a “cartoonish” ways of bad guys vs good guys. 
 

here is a good interview from yesterday with president of Turkey. I must admit I found his answer on Crimea very confusing. Not sure what design Turkey has on the ancestral land of the Tartar khans. 
 

 

[mcliu]

If Russia decides to nuke Ukraine what's the appropriate Western response? Nuke Moscow? Are we willing to risk mutually assured destruction over Ukraine?

[Spekulatius]

24 minutes ago, mcliu said:

If Russia decides to nuke Ukraine what's the appropriate Western response? Nuke Moscow? Are we willing to risk mutually assured destruction over Ukraine?

Conventional strike. Lot's of cruise missiles on military targets in occupied Ukraine and Russia.

 

Sea blockade. No ships leaves Russian harbors. No ship goes in.

 

Just a few options. I have no idea, but I think a nuclear counterstrike is not likely, at least not as a first measure. If Russia continues with nuclear weapons it well eventually escalate.

 

FWIW, i don't think giving Ukraine 50 nuclear warheads on ballistic missiles is the worst idea in this case.

Edited September 21, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

People can say what they want, but there is nothing Western powers can do if Russia goes nuclear tactically.
 

But at this point I would think the chances are low, as they have not exhausted the landmass for its resources. And Motherland is not at risk.  
 

Nuclear wasn’t that taboo, when Mcarthur was planning to drop 50 of them on Manchuria. Even the mighty President Bush (‘41) considered it using against Iraq in 1991 as a threat. A threat is not a threat if you are not willing to pull the trigger. 
 

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-xpm-1991-03-10-9103090421-story.html

[Xerxes]

8 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

Conventional strike. Lot's of cruise missiles on military targets in occupied Ukraine and Russia.

 

Sea blockade. No ships leaves Russian harbors. No ship goes in.

and what would President Biden say exactly as he address the nation that we are blowing things up inside Russia proper.   
 

That is for all intent and purpose a declaration of war.
 

You may think it is limited strikes and what not. But the other side doesn’t see that. 
 

If Russia couldn’t hide its full scale military invasion behind “special ops bs”, the West cannot hide its open declaration of war behind some “proportional NATO response mumbo jumbo”

[shhughes1116]

56 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

Conventional strike. Lot's of cruise missiles on military targets in occupied Ukraine and Russia.

 

Sea blockade. No ships leaves Russian harbors. No ship goes in.

 

Just a few options. I have no idea, but I think a nuclear counterstrike is not likely, at least not as a first measure. If Russia continues with nuclear weapons it well eventually escalate.

 

FWIW, i don't think giving Ukraine 50 nuclear warheads on ballistic missiles is the worst idea in this case.

NATO is not going to strike Russia, unless Russia strikes NATO first.

 

I see it more likely that the West provides Ukraine with multiple mobile nuclear weapons, just enough to cause Putin to think twice about striking Ukraine. 
 

on a semi-related note, heavy artillery on the Zaporizchzhia front today and the Ukrainians removed some of their minefields recently.  Things might get saucy soon around Melitopol and Mauriopil. 

[Pelagic]

40 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

and what would President Biden say exactly as he address the nation that we are blowing things up inside Russia proper.   
 

That is for all intent and purpose a declaration of war.
 

You may think it is limited strikes and what not. But the other side doesn’t see that. 
 

If Russia couldn’t hide its full scale military invasion behind “special ops bs”, the West cannot hide its open declaration of war behind some “proportional NATO response mumbo jumbo”

 

Let's remember Russia committed somewhere in the neighborhood of 80% of their conventional forces to fighting in Ukraine. A NATO lead conventional strike on Russian forces in Ukraine isn't nearly as escalatory as striking targets within Russia yet could still do significant damage to Russia's military.

 

I still think the use of nuclear weapons, even tactical ones, is mostly talk by Russia. Tactical nuclear weapons aren't an instant remedy for Russia's underequipped and undertrained army. They were designed to buy defenders time against tank formations in the hundreds during the Cold War. Ukraine's "armored fist" that broke through to Kupiansk was something like 17 tanks. There's videos all over reddit and twitter of the recent Ukrainian offensive, a dozen vehicles here, another dozen elsewhere - these aren't the large formations that TNWs were designed for. Add to that you get into the strange position of using TNWs to defend territory you just held a sham referendum to label Russia. And it's not like Russia has the real time intelligence to strike Ukrainian force buildups accurately with TNWs either, otherwise the submarine launched Kalibir missiles they launched at power plants two weeks ago would have targeted Ukraine's ongoing offensive instead of a single powerplant. You have to hope someone in the Russian command structure is asking themselves these questions and is also concluding there just isn't a target worth the ramifications of using nuclear weapons. And on Ukraine's side they're likely aware of this too and not massing forces in a way that they present a target that Russian could strike.

[Xerxes]

@Pelagic

 

I agree. I said earlier that it is low risk, (even lower than six months ago) given the framework that has been established in the past six months. 
 

My comment was about NATO response to a hypothetical tactical nuclear strike somewhere in Ukraine. Even a NATO direct conventional strike against Russian forces only in Ukraine has no tangible benefit given the shamble position of the Russian military forces already there BUT has all the downside of whatever we are not thinking about it. 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Xerxes

[Parsad]

1 hour ago, Xerxes said:

@Pelagic

 

I agree. I said earlier that it is low risk, (even lower than six months ago) given the framework that has been established in the past six months. 
 

My comment was about NATO response to a hypothetical tactical nuclear strike somewhere in Ukraine. Even a NATO direct conventional strike against Russian forces only in Ukraine has no tangible benefit given the shamble position of the Russian military forces already there BUT has all the downside of whatever we are not thinking about it. 

 

Russia is bluffing.  If nuclear weapons were used on Ukraine, China would step in before the U.S. to deter Russia.  China is not interested in this crap.  They want to keep Putin on a comfortable leash, but not stir a global calamity. 

 

China wants Russia to push Ukraine far enough so that the World understands that Taiwan could suffer the same fate...but China definitely doesn't want sanctions or to create a World crisis.  Putin's position is also at risk...his generals do not want to escalate this thing much further...certainly not nuclear. 

 

This will all end some time next year...Putin will be replaced or get his piece of Ukraine and consider it a victory.  Everyone else will backdown and the U.S. will bring the remaining portion of Ukraine into NATO.  Cheers!

[Xerxes]

@Parsad

You forgot one thing:   President Biden beaming in pride as he runs for a second term on the back of presiding over the humiliation of Russia and the return of the Internationalist/Globalist as a specie. 

 

On nukes, Russia is indeed bluffing. I am of that view as well. 

 

But I would add that we also thought they were bluffing in Feb 2022, where they mounted a full scale invasion that made absolutely no sense. Our current point of views are shaped on what we know and what we think we know, steeped in analysis. Not what we dont know. For whatever reason, there was tripwire that went off in Kremlin in second half 2021 early 2022. Even Lavrov probably did not know the extent of Russia involvement on the eve of the invasion & certainly not us.

 

Of course, we in the West can look back and build a narrative around it, in terms of why/what and write essays about it etc. But that is after the fact, when we do our analysis, establish new biases etc.

 

On China, you are correct on everying except the assumption that Bejing can CTRL-Z an already exploded Russian tactical nuke. If it were to happen it will be a fair accompli based on some nonsense about terrirtoral integrity of newly annexed region .... there would be no posturing. But like it said, my biases tells me that were are not there and wont be there, but certainly the pathway is being created via annexation to bring those newly "minted" territories under its nuclear umbrella.

 

With Russia, it is all about grey zones and ambiguities and hybrid wars and plausible deniability. That is how they ran the 2014-2021 war in the Donbas region. Hybrid war. They were there but not there but still there but really not there but kind of there.

Edited September 21, 2022 by Xerxes

[Spekulatius]

I read some transcripts of what Putin has been saying regarding nukes and he makes it appear like NATO threatens Russia with Nukes.

 

Also, Putin always does some saber rattling on UN meetings and of course he needed something to go along with his partial mobilization. So, I think this is just for show and not really anything new.

 

I agree with @shhughes1116 that Ukraine may do something on the offensive before late fall and winter when offensive operations become more difficult. Cutting that Landbridge to Crimea would very nice.

 

I also think that it’s getting more and more likely that Germany is going to give some tanks or Marder vehicles to Ukraine since Scholz is running out of excuses. Would be cool to see German tanks with Ukraine flags rolling.

[aws]

It's amazing how many contradictions the Kremlin can try and get away with.

 

It's a war, but you'd go to jail if you called it a war instead of a special military operation.

 

A war to protect the Russian speaking population, fought by laying waste to all civilian buildings and infrastructure in the area they are liberating.

 

Russia is crushing the Ukrainian army in battle. Killing 100k vs. 6k Russian losses per their announcement this morning, but they need to mobilize 300k new troops to continue the effort.

 

At least the most recent one is good news: A primary goal was stated as "denazification" of Ukraine, as primarily represented by the Azov battalion. But the news today is that Putin agreed to release the commanders of Azov and a couple hundred of the other Azovstal defenders.

 

https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/09/22/more-azovstal-defenders-return-home-from-russian-captivity-after-pow-exchange/

 

 

[Spekulatius]

3 minutes ago, aws said:

It's amazing how many contradictions the Kremlin can try and get away with.

 

It's a war, but you'd go to jail if you called it a war instead of a special military operation.

 

A war to protect the Russian speaking population, fought by laying waste to all civilian buildings and infrastructure in the area they are liberating.

 

Russia is crushing the Ukrainian army in battle. Killing 100k vs. 6k Russian losses per their announcement this morning, but they need to mobilize 300k new troops to continue the effort.

 

At least the most recent one is good news: A primary goal was stated as "denazification" of Ukraine, as primarily represented by the Azov battalion. But the news today is that Putin agreed to release the commanders of Azov and a couple hundred of the other Azovstal defenders.

 

https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/09/22/more-azovstal-defenders-return-home-from-russian-captivity-after-pow-exchange/

 

 

Orwell coined the term doublethink for it.

 

In George Orwell's dystopian classic 1984, doublethink is the act of holding, simultaneously, two opposite, individually exclusive ideas or opinions and believing in both simultaneously and absolutely. Doublethink requires using logic against logic or suspending disbelief in the contradiction.

 

[james22]

Russia is already crashing demographically, and the main cohort of this war is coming from the men who should be fathering children. “This is a potentially a country killer. Before I thought that this was Russia’s last war. Now I’m certain of it.”

 

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=52709

[Xerxes]

War on the Rocks

Not sure who recommended to me this Podcast. As it is the only non-investing podcast I listen to. The recent episode (there is a part 2 to it) was fun to listen to as it delves into 1990s. There are not much books written on the Chechen conflicts.

 

The podcast also recommends a recent book called "Command" written by one of the guests on that episodes. 

 

Command: The Politics of Military Operations from Korea to Ukraine: Freedman, Lawrence: 9780197540671: Books - Amazon.ca

 

Here is a review from The Guardian and The Economist:

Command by Lawrence Freedman review – inside the war room | Politics books | The Guardian

In war, the key tussles are often between generals and leaders | The Economist

 

The book boast a 600 page and looks to be a great addition for my (anybody else's) unread pile of books.

[Spekulatius]

If these reports are true, they are drafting regardless of military experience in Russia.

 

There are quite a few more of these stories around, so I think this is not an isolated case. They are pulling in bodies from wherever they can.