Russia-Ukrainian War

[Blugolds11]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

One of the best tactical assesment I have seen in German (or Austrian )

 

 

Cliff notes for those of us who are a little rusty on the translation (aka dont speak the language at all)?

[formthirteen]

- The first challenge is to keep control of Kiev which so far has been successful.

- The second challenge is in the east where the Ukrainians might become encircled. Dnipro and Zaporizhzhia are key cities where the Dnieper can be crossed.

- The third attack vector from Brest, if it were to happen, could cause panic even if not completely successful.

- The fourth attack vector is the biggest problem. It follows the Ukrainian steppe in the south which allows for rapid advancement. Mechanized troops are vulnerable to attacks from the air.

 

[Blugolds11]

@formthirteen thanks!

[Spekulatius]

6 hours ago, formthirteen said:

- The first challenge is to keep control of Kiev which so far has been successful.

- The second challenge is in the east where the Ukrainians might become encircled. Dnipro and Zaporizhzhia are key cities where the Dnieper can be crossed.

- The third attack vector from Brest, if it were to happen, could cause panic even if not completely successful.

- The fourth attack vector is the biggest problem. It follows the Ukrainian steppe in the south which allows for rapid advancement. Mechanized troops are vulnerable to attacks from the air.

 

@formthirteen great summary. I think 3 & 4 are the biggest issues. So far Belarus has not been involved, but could be, The goal for this vector would be to cut of supplies from the west.

 

This Austrian officer assessment is pretty good. They also have another video up on YT on how a Russian battalion operates.

 

When you listen to Putin’s soccer stadium rally and the other talk yesterday it’s clear he won’t let go. He sacked some generals and I guess there were some new guys now in charge that come up with Plan B (Plan A was Blitzkrieg and it clearly failed ) which might be what the Austrian officer described. This war is going to take quite some time - more than 4 weeks from here  is my guess.

Edited March 19, 2022 by Spekulatius

[no_free_lunch]

This is what the Russians are saying. It actually is encouraging. They are admitting to switching tactics. 

 

Heads up, Russian propaganda below.

 

"

The second phase of the military operation has begun. Russia first used hypersonic missile "Daggers" and began to destroy entire brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, now the fighting will be tougher

 

 At today's briefing of the Ministry of Defense, information was announced about the use of the Bastion and Dagger complexes as part of a special military operation. This is the first officially confirmed use of these types of weapons in a real conflict.

 

 This fact, as well as the emerging information about the successful use of cruise missiles against the mercenary base near Lvov and the location of the 79th brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near Nikolaev, suggests that Russia, with a high degree of probability, has begun the second phase of the NMD. And now, unlike the first stage, the conduct of hostilities is built not on the classical concept of a large-scale offensive, but on the principles of “new generation” armed conflicts, when, instead of a ground offensive, priority is given to the use of long-range precision weapons and mobile special-purpose sabotage groups. Such an approach, although it will require more time for the complete demilitarization of Ukraine, will significantly reduce the possible losses of regular ground formations of the RF Armed Forces.

 

 Thus, the military operation is increasingly beginning to look like a tough modern war by all the rules, which greatly frightens the Ukrainian leadership, which is increasingly turning to NATO with a request to create a no-fly zone. However, predictably, there is no talk of any no-fly zone.

"

Edited March 19, 2022 by no_free_lunch

[Spekulatius]

The analogies between Putin and  Hitler become clearer and closer. Putin is already in full blown genocide mode, his war rally to celebrate the Crimean annexation in Moscow is similar to Goebbels Sportpalast speech ( Wollt Ihr den totalen Krieg!) - both were after a strategic defeat (Stalingrad) and now he fired of his hypersonic Wunderwaffe in the general direction of the NATO.

Just like the NAZI‘s did, he is looking for friends in Asia. similar to Hitler and the Nazis, Putin is always doubling up, if he loses, betting that the other sides doesn’t call his cards.

While nothing is every exactly the same, history does rhyme and this rhyme looks very scary to me. I am of the opinion that we are already in a war with Russia already  we just don’t call it like it is yet. I don‘t think we can kick this can down the road either, hope I am wrong.

 

The implications for the equity market are not positive, I think.

 

On a related note, it isn’t just Putins war either, there is a significant part of the population aligned with him. There is also a significant part that is not - mostly young people. This YouTube 1420 channel gives an interesting view on how people in Russia think, with random looking street interviews. Some folks are quite gutsy, putting out there opinions like that:

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Pelagic]

Good summary of the war. Russia failed in its initial objectives and now a stalemate that neither side can break is likely going forward.

 

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-19

 

Keep looking for Russian propaganda plays like the hypersonic missiles, more big bad scary Chechens being sent to fight, etc. Their real impact is likely to be quite limited but Russia uses them as domestic propaganda wins and they get the western media in a frenzy too. As stated above the main strategy is going to be massed artillery on Ukrainian cities in an attempt to break Ukraine's will to fight. If conventional bombing of British, German, and Japanese cities during WWII taught us anything, it won't and will likely have the opposite effect.

 

Article that raises some questions about the hypersonic missile for instance: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44840/we-have-questions-about-russias-claimed-kinzhal-hypersonic-missile-use-in-ukraine

[Spekulatius]

The hypersonic Khinzal missile is probably just as useful than the V1 was in WW2, it’s more propaganda than anything else. It does not matter much if they have it - it’s a very expensive weapon to use in any case, considering that the Russian don’t seem to even have a lot of conventional precision guided missiles.

[Spekulatius]

Looks like we are  at a stalemate know:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/what-stalemate-means-ukraine-and-why-it-matters

 

Interesting interview regarding Belarus. Belarus  has been a staging ground for the Russians, but have not joined th. Their army is tiny too. Lukoshenko has a difficult choice. Appetite to join from the population seems low. I do think the Ukrainians believe he will join:

 

State of the Russian army:

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

On 3/19/2022 at 8:14 AM, Spekulatius said:

@formthirteen great summary. I think 3 & 4 are the biggest issues. So far Belarus has not been involved, but could be, The goal for this vector would be to cut of supplies from the west.

 

This Austrian officer assessment is pretty good. They also have another video up on YT on how a Russian battalion operates.

 

When you listen to Putin’s soccer stadium rally and the other talk yesterday it’s clear he won’t let go. He sacked some generals and I guess there were some new guys now in charge that come up with Plan B (Plan A was Blitzkrieg and it clearly failed ) which might be what the Austrian officer described. This war is going to take quite some time - more than 4 weeks from here  is my guess.

I don’t know what you define as blitzkreig.

But a Heinz Guderian-style blitzkreig would be (in my mind) Russian armour closely supported by air dashing ahead past Kiev and cities looking to outflank, encircle enemy military formation. Thereby bypassing the cities. 
 

once enemy military formations are obliterated then you would get the towns and cities through negotiations and political settlement. as oppose to first going for the cities.
 

Pre-Bonaparte, Europe was also big on “capturing cities” but Napoleon (to some degree influenced by Prussia) demonstrated that it is far important to destroy enemy military formations and get the cities through settlement. 

 

I am not sure I have any clue on what Plan A was suppose to be with Putin. Perhaps he truly believe the people would raise up to overthrow their own government. If that delusion was Plan A, so plan B would be what we know: moving the siege guns and battery rams into position.
 

either way no blitzkrieg IMO.
 

Also there is the element that in Putin’z mind, he was actually waging a limited war to “encourage peasants to march on Kiev and overthrow their own government”. that limited war has morphed into something he can no longer control. 

 

War cannot be limited. You go all in with clear objectives. 

[Spekulatius]

Another interesting tidbit I learned form twitter. Some of Ukraine drone's are using Starlink:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/03/starlink-helps-ukraines-elite-drone-unit-target-and-destroy-russian-tanks/

 

Raised my respect for Elon Musk a bit.

[Xerxes]

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-03-22/niall-ferguson-putin-and-biden-misunderstand-history-in-ukraine-war
 

great read by Niall Ferguson. 
Glad to see he is not delusional and not in the “lets fight the Russian to the last Ukrainian crowd” 
 

[no_free_lunch]

Xerxes, it's a good read.  I agree with so much of it. In particular that the war is not won and Russia may prevail.  However what is the solution, just let Ukraine burn?

 

The way I see it, they want to fight. They are desperate for weapons. Help them out. 

 

Read the Ukrainian history. A few thousand dead is bad but the Russians killed millions of Ukrainian citizens in the 30s.  There's no going back to that.  This is the huge fact that the author ignores. What will happen if Ukraine loses the war.  How many will die in that case.

 

 

[changegonnacome]

Think Ferguson nailed it and wrapped it up well in his summary:

 

"Ukraine is not Afghanistan in the 1980s, and even if it were, this war isn’t going to last 10 years — more like 10 weeks. Allowing Ukraine to be bombed to rubble by Putin is not smart; it creates the chance for him to achieve his goal of rendering Ukrainian independence unviable. Putin, like most Russian leaders in history, will most likely die of natural causes."

 

1 hour ago, no_free_lunch said:

The way I see it, they want to fight. They are desperate for weapons. Help them out. 

 

I disagree......unless the West has plans to 'put boots on the ground' it is prolonging the inevitable defeat while Ukraine's major cities are turned to rubble and its economy returned to 1940's. Ukraine one way or the other will end up at the negotiating table the junior crippled defeated party.......the most likely 'peace deal' available now with Russia versus what may be available in 10 weeks time is about the same in my estimation. Between now and 10 weeks ungodly amounts of misery will be inflicted on the Ukrainian people & damage done to its cities/infrastructure.

 

I'm from Ireland and we had a conflict in Northern Ireland (part of the UK)  that older folks here might remember........the history of that conflict is that 'help' by way of donations from well meaning Irish-American's fueled the conflict way past the point of when it might have ended naturally.....some historians estimate the violence may have ended a full decade earlier if it weren't for the 'help' sent by good intentioned people helping with the fight against the British imperialists but who had no real sense of the complexity on the ground...........interventionism has unintended consequences (hasnt the USA learned this lesson yet?). Zelensky's social media savvy & communications skills in influencing & engaging the West, while admirable, may prolong the inevitable while in reality greatly increasing the cost to 'his' nation. He has no good choices that I can see..........choosing the least worst option & explaining it to his people is what great leaders do & he should use his considerable & superior communication skills to sell a comprise solution to his people while ensuring the West is a party to or guarantor of whatever is agreed with Russia.

Edited March 23, 2022 by changegonnacome

[Viking]

4 hours ago, Xerxes said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-03-22/niall-ferguson-putin-and-biden-misunderstand-history-in-ukraine-war
 

great read by Niall Ferguson. 
Glad to see he is not delusional and not in the “lets fight the Russian to the last Ukrainian crowd” 

The problem with Fergusons article is he does not shed a flicker of light on the most important question in this conflict: what Putin actually wants today from Ukraine to end the conflict? Ferguson assumes there is a deal to be made that is acceptable to Putin. Really? OK. Great! But… what is the deal?
 

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country (if Putin is openly willing to kill Russian’s who oppose him imagine what he will do to all the Ukrainians are killing Russians by the thousands right now). Yes… it will not be pretty. How many thousand Ukrainians does Ferguson estimate Putin will kill once he is back in control of the country? 10,000? 20,000? Maybe 3 or 4 Ukrainians for every Russian who was killed? 
 

Instead, all Ferguson wants to talk about is how the Ukrainian situation is hopeless. And the US (and Europe) are doing all the wrong things and so should stop before any more people get killed. Now maybe we will learn in the coming years that the West totally screwed up in Ukraine. And that Putin is not such a bad guy (for a dictator). But today, Ferguson sounds to me like he could have been a speech writer for Neville Chamberlain back in the day.

—————

Ferguson is one of my favourite historical/financial authors. Putin is the central character in the Ukraine play (Ferguson assumes Putin is a rational actor and won’t use tactical nuclear etc). And Zelenski/Ukraine. And Europe. He might want to talk more about them in his next article. 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Viking

[Xerxes]

Putin is a rational actor. He will not push the red apocalyptic button as that would be MAD but will use tactical nuclear, if the foundation of Russia (=> his regime really <=) is threatened. This prolonging war & sanctions threaten the very core of his regime, so that is a real possibility, and I am not in the ‘that would never happen’ camp when it comes tactical nukes. 

[Xerxes]

5 hours ago, Viking said:

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country (if Putin is openly willing to kill Russian’s who oppose him imagine what he will do to all the Ukrainians are killing Russians by the thousands right now). Yes… it will not be pretty. How many thousand Ukrainians does Ferguson estimate Putin will kill once he is back in control of the country? 10,000? 20,000? Maybe 3 or 4 Ukrainians for every Russian who was killed? 
 

Instead, all Ferguson wants to talk about is how the Ukrainian situation is hopeless. And the US (and Europe) are doing all the wrong things and so should stop before any more people get killed. Now maybe we will learn in the coming years that the West totally screwed up in Ukraine. And that Putin is not such a bad guy (for a dictator).
 

But today, Ferguson sounds to me like he could have been a speech writer for Neville Chamberlain back in the day.

————

 

 

if there is some sort of peace, Putin entire focus will shift back to Russia to shore up his regime and find those “traitors” who had mislead him. Killing Ukrainian would mean unleashing an insurgency in himself a day later the conventional fighting ended, and turning this into his Afghanistan. 
 

I happen to believe that while they had plans to decapitate the Ukrainian regime (Zelensky) at the onset of the conflict, as the conflict unfolded they probably came to the conclusion that he is needed to be the person alive as the president making peace given his popularity. 

Same way Tokyo was not nuked in 1945 but two other cities were. 
 

this is Iran-Iraq war all over again with two exhausted boxers, fighting to stalemate, but one side may decide to use a pistol if push comes to shove. 

[Spekulatius]

No one can predict how a war ends and many things can happen. War creates it's own dynamic where more and more resources and countries can get sucked in.

Putin can't let go because a defeat is unthinkable for him, so he always doubles up on losing hands. US can't drop Ukraine like a hot potato or there is no credibility left with any ally in the future. it would be LT suicide for US foreign politics as well as for Biden and the next election.

 

So I can easily see an escalation where the Genocidal Russian siege tactics cause the US to give more and heavier weapons to the Ukraine to defend itself or bombing of civilians trying to get out or supply lines in Western Ukraine cause NATO to create a no fly zone in western parts of the Ukraine which again is close to declaring war directly on Russia.

 

Many ways this can escalate and getting the NATO involved in some way. We are already at war with Russia (imo) just are dancing around some more or less imaginary marks.

 

As for hoping for a regime change in Russia, while possible, I think it's unlikely and in any way shouldn't be counted upon. I think the goal of the sanctions need to be to destroy the Russian economy to such an extend that they can't support the military any more (as shabby as it is right now even) posing much less of a threat in the next few years. Every war starts with money and resources and while Russia has resources, their economy is pitiful and making it even more so should further defang them.

 

Russia can pivot to China, but if the West reduces NG dependency, they need to spent billions to build new pipeline infrastructure for NG delivery to China and China likely will pay far less than the Europeans. I think in the end, it's just business for the Chinese. They will do what makes sense to them, but not more to help the Russians.

 

 

[james22]

6 hours ago, Viking said:

But of course Ferguson can’t suggest what Ukraine would likely have to agree to (it will be far worse than the worst thing anyone on this board can come up with). Or what Putin would do to Ukraine once he is firmly in control of the country

 

For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.

[Spekulatius]

11 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.

Does anyone here really have delusions what "de-nazification" means for the Russians as it pertains to Ukraine?

[Xerxes]

No one is under any illusion that a permanent cease fire would mean swaths of eastern Ukraine de-populated either by choice or by Moscow, to give the re-drawn map more permanency. Living under Russian yoke, or anywhere proximate to it, is not a life worth living. 

I ll push back on the Chamberlain/Munich comment (re: how Neil would be a good speech writer). I get it. Who doesn’t want to pound their chest and be Churchillian, all day long, in face of adversity. But that is the version of history where that scenario played itself out. This is not Lord of the Rings, where it always have a good ending, no matter how many times you watch it.  
 

Can you imagine Emperor Hirohito getting all Churchillian as the atomic bombs were being dropped in 1945. “We will fight to the last man, we will fight in the mountains” It is not like he knew that post-war Japan would thrive economically. At moment in 1945, Hirohito needed to be a Chamberline not a Churchill, while full knowing they were being subjugated and the post war economic prosperity being unknown to him.
 

Btw And there were 2 atomic explosions because Americans had only 2 bombs. If they had 15, they would have nuked every city (saving Tokyo for the last) from south to north and north to south, all day long and every day. That is what that war was. Eradicating the Japanese race from the face of the planet unless unconditional surrender is tendered. 
 

Edit : before anyone gets excited and points out Pearl Habour etc. it doesn’t matter … that is what the war evolved into. Unconditional surrender means only one thing. Subjugation or destruction.  

Edited March 23, 2022 by Xerxes

[Viking]

2 hours ago, Xerxes said:

No one is under any illusion that a permanent cease fire would mean swaths of eastern Ukraine de-populated either by choice or by Moscow, to give the re-drawn map more permanency. Living under Russian yoke, or anywhere proximate to it, is not a life worth living. 

I ll push back on the Chamberlain/Munich comment (re: how Neil would be a good speech writer). I get it. Who doesn’t want to pound their chest and be Churchillian, all day long, in face of adversity. But that is the version of history where that scenario played itself out. This is not Lord of the Rings, where it always have a good ending, no matter how many times you watch it.  
 

Can you imagine Emperor Hirohito getting all Churchillian as the atomic bombs were being dropped in 1945. “We will fight to the last man, we will fight in the mountains” It is not like he knew that post-war Japan would thrive economically. At moment in 1945, Hirohito needed to be a Chamberline not a Churchill, while full knowing they were being subjugated and the post war economic prosperity being unknown to him.
 

Btw And there were 2 atomic explosions because Americans had only 2 bombs. If they had 15, they would have nuked every city (saving Tokyo for the last) from south to north and north to south, all day long and every day. That is what that war was. Eradicating the Japanese race from the face of the planet unless unconditional surrender is tendered. 
 

Edit : before anyone gets excited and points out Pearl Habour etc. it doesn’t matter … that is what the war evolved into. Unconditional surrender means only one thing. Subjugation or destruction.  

Great discussion. i am not trying to be ‘Churchillian’. @james22 quote hits the nail on the head: “For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.”  WHAT A BEAUTIFULLY SOUNDING PLAY ON WORDS. That is a Disney statement if i ever heard one. It is something only an dreamy eyed ACADEMIC would write. 

 

I’ll ask it again.
1.) what is it Putin actually wants today from Ukraine to end the conflict?

2.) what will he do to Ukraine once he has it firmly in his control? How many Ukrainians will die AFTER the Russians have control? +10,000? How many Ukrainians will be displaced/forced to leave their country/live in a different part of Ukraine? Millions?
 

If you can’t answer these 2 questions with a high degree of certainty THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN SUGGEST THROWING IN THE TOWEL IS THE BETTER OPTION for the Ukrainian people. 
—————

Bottom line, i have no idea how this situation will play out. And i hope Ukraine finds a way through it  

 

 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Viking

[Xerxes]

I don’t have an answer either on those two questions. 
 

the only thing that I can think of as a tangible Russian “ask” is the control of the Black Sea coast and related cities (Odessa, Mariople). Everything else they don’t need anymore (I.e Kiev) they will pound & burn and inact such a high cost on the poor Ukrainian, and forever keep the city under the spectre of threat as a “hostage”.  
 

that is the only think I can think of. 
 

fully agree with Spek, that we are now in war with Russia, in all but name. 

[Lazarus]

Putin set out his demands to end the war on multiple occasions. Most recently, he set out his demands in a phone call with the leader of Turkey (who passed on the message). Putin is asking for (1) no NATO in Ukraine,  Ukraine stays neutral; (2) recognize Crimea as Russia, plus various other smaller demands (get rid of "nazis", some demands for Donask or wherever, and some other stuff).

 

The big demands relate to NATO and Crimea, and Zelensky has already acquiesced to giving up on NATO and Crimea is already a done deal. So they will haggle over the minor stuff and make concessions so that they can both save face and claim victory. This conflict is almost over. 

[Xerxes]

To be fair, I think Viking meant what Putin really wants. I.e what will really bring closure. Not just the formal demands.