Nice post (me having worked several years in Russian and Ukrainian universities), but some nits and nuts to pick:
1. "There are some brave protests, even despite the very high probability of arrest — yet, there does not yet exist the kind of widespread popular dissatisfaction that brought down the Soviet Union." Indeed, no serious uprising against the czar in sight. AND there was none in the USSR. Not "widespread popular dissatisfaction that brought down the Soviet Union": bad economics forced Gorb. to try reforms, there was a coup by parts of the party against him. Jelzin saved the day (with some public support, but it was NOT an uprising against the government). And dismantled the USSR, usu. by letting people choose. Huge majorities choose to leave - 90% in Ukraine. And many would now, just: no vote.
2. Putin is not threatened by NATO. And he knows it, he is no idiot (you got that right). But: His rule could be threatened by a democratic Ukraine, prospering by choosing the west. Russians are unimpressed by the Baltic's success (or Poland's) - they might see things differently if even their "Ukrainian brothers" would turn richer than them - without the gas etc.. (call it wishful thinking, but my friend Dr. Andreas Umland hopes so). As long as Ukrainians failed (partly cuz Russia loved meddling in their politics. Ex-convict turned president Yanukovych was his toy.) all was fine. Since 2017 they can enter the EU without a visa - and work in Poland - while the "liberated" Donbass went south and even Crimeans were mostly disappointed. - Anyways, giving up power and influence is not something Putin likes to do. Who does?
3. Sadly, the Budapest Memorandum was not a security guarantee, but as the US so did Russia (and the UK) pledge: "A) ... not to invade Ukraine". (And other things Putin ignored.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
"is that China needs to see that things won’t be easy for it, if it ever tries to invade Taiwan."
If I was China I would look at the last year and conclude that Total War is inevitable. Some people think that the prospect of Total War will scare China, but if it's inevitable you might as well just prepare for it. It's obvious from Ukraine that covert support for color revolutions is strong and respect for spheres of influence is weak. China isn't going to get any stronger after 2028 relative to the west.
"In the meantime, we can respect the brave, effective fighting shown by Ukraine’s outnumbered soldiers."
The Ukrainians outnumber the Russians significantly. Russia had a material advantage early on but the west has evened that out for the most part.
I predict Ukraine will "win" this conflict, though life for Ukrainians will be worse no matter the outcome. They might even have been better off with a short loss. The obvious answer at this point is to declare the current front lines the new international border, but this does not serve western interests.
The odds of nuclear war are small, but think of the cost. People thought the Cuban Missile Crisis was brilliant statesmanship and then later we find out that a Russian sub came incredibly close to launching a nuke.
Thank you for an excellent article based upon facts and reason. I would quibble about a tiny part. You wrote, "But, the idea that fascists are a major force in Ukraine is ridiculous. Ukraine's President is Jewish."
Ashkenazi Jews have a genetic predisposition for Tay-Sachs disease. However, no Jews have a genetically inherited predisposition against fascism, as witnessed by those few Jews who equate 'chosen' with 'master race,' such as Meir Kahne and other ultra-nationalist Israeli Jews.
"EU (which also requires member countries to defend each other.)"
The first page of the link refutes this
"the article does not say that the assistance should be military in nature, so countries such as Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden that have a policy of neutrality, can still cooperate"
1) putin had "planned" for this from 2014, realising he would have to make a stand but in reality, more of a decoy to deflect from the next stage of Russian economic growth. most likely outcome in next few months, crimea gets the water back on on a tariff basis, eastern republics stay neutral and UKR never joins NATO. all three very palatable to Western democracies given state of affairs in 2021. Averting a major war, but also weakening Russia future biz ties with west, UKR staying weak for many years as unable to join Euro bloc soon, unfortunate and avoidable for UKR...but what next for Russia?
2) All western investments in Russia are transferred to China and India, given their energy intensive growth models and strategies. Putin saw the renewable expansion in UK and Europe and realised this was the zenith of their share in energy to Europe, they werent winning any more wallet share and now is a good time to sale. He cant force a sale, but invading will force the corporations to do the bidding of Putin given popular sentiment is so completely apragmatic, and as they have, at a loss,. China will now pick up the firesale energy, India coal.
3) Russia and China going forward decide who gets what in Africa while everyone is looking to Europe. Russia influence extending over West Africa through French decline and China through the East of the continent.
4) Russia will play the role of partner to the silk road initiative and key resource supplier to India. Still able to participate in any Western development indirectly via the China economic expansion project and via the rapidly rising India development.
5) MSM pointing to Putin sentimentality over Kyiv as CHristian center (seen on Fox) or irate at NATO expansion, misunderstand Putin and is modus operandi completely. He is completely aware of NATO expansion for many years, he cares nothing for religion, the man is a trained counter-intel officer, a) they are picked because they are completely rational and high EQ and b) he survived and thrived so not only did he have those attributes, he excelled in them. Meaning, sentimentality or snapping are completely out of his makeup. The west have to realised that this early stage conflagration in UKR and all west reactions are very likely within all of his contingencies and west should start looking at to what his really after. Clearly if he isnt sending in the 100% airforce and just some low level conscripts, it wasnt to win UKR outright in a battle, but to let it drag on.....
NATO is not a threat. NATO is a pact for mutual defense against lying, terrorist, murderous nations intent on subjugating and enslaving others. NATO has invaded no one. russia has in a murderous campaign to steal everything from the people of Ukraine, murder them, drive them out or put them on their knees. THe idea that they should ever get down on their knees and be neutral to the evil empire that is russia is disgusting.
Glad to see you writing on this. I'd like to spread an idea I hope policymakers are thinking of. The US should be sending drones to fight the Russians, sub rosa. Drones controlled from Kansas. No US soldiers will die. Russian soldiers will, but we'll have deniability, so the Russians will save face. If they want to accuse us and nuke Romania, they can, but they won't be pressured into that. When they shoot down drones, the Made in USA on them won't be evidence that we were operating them-- it could be we just gave them to the Ukrainians to use.
After reading the article on The Hill about your findings or views, and reviewing your current survey of the situation, several questions come to mind. Do you have access to Ukrainian and Russian army Orders of Battle to more realistically analyze casualty reports and their effects on each side's readiness? Do you employ a conceptual framework for measuring success of each side's operational plans (EX: Principles of War, Centers of Gravity)? If Ukraine's overmatched army has successfully stalled a much larger force, what factors (leadership, training, motivation, external support - wpns like javelin, stinger) are the most decisive? Intel sources to date estimate around 7000 in 3 weeks yet only a handful of cities have fallen. The prize, Kiev, could revisit a repeat of Stalingrad. vmi74@aol.com
> Other Russian propaganda — such as the unsuccessful attempt to pretend Ukraine was starting the attack — also consists of grotesque lies.
You seem to be following the MSM narrative on the development of the war. According to other sources, it seems that a major portion of the Ukrainian army (60,000 personnel?) have been encircled in a so-called Russian "cauldron" in the East, while the Azof fighters are trapped in Mariupol. That so many forces were located in that region seems to give credence to the notion that they were preparing an attack on the Donbas and were prevented by the Russian first move.
> First, let’s note that Russia has displayed gross military incompetence,
As mentioned before, this is the MSM narrative. Other analysts who seem to know what they're talking about have a very different reading of the situation.
Unfortunately, you repeat some Russian propaganda in this piece: "Russia also supported violent separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions." That was always a Russian military operation, not separatists. As the early leader of the operation, Strelkov, famously said over an open radio frequency: "the Ukrainians won't fight." It was always "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their patches taken off) doing the fighting.
Also, I believe you put a Russian-propaganda spin on Ukraine joining NATO. Putin never believed there was a threat that the west would invade Russia. He just always wanted to take back Ukraine for Russia, and knew NATO membership would prevent that (and the same with other former holdings of Russia/Soviet Union).
Nice post (me having worked several years in Russian and Ukrainian universities), but some nits and nuts to pick:
1. "There are some brave protests, even despite the very high probability of arrest — yet, there does not yet exist the kind of widespread popular dissatisfaction that brought down the Soviet Union." Indeed, no serious uprising against the czar in sight. AND there was none in the USSR. Not "widespread popular dissatisfaction that brought down the Soviet Union": bad economics forced Gorb. to try reforms, there was a coup by parts of the party against him. Jelzin saved the day (with some public support, but it was NOT an uprising against the government). And dismantled the USSR, usu. by letting people choose. Huge majorities choose to leave - 90% in Ukraine. And many would now, just: no vote.
2. Putin is not threatened by NATO. And he knows it, he is no idiot (you got that right). But: His rule could be threatened by a democratic Ukraine, prospering by choosing the west. Russians are unimpressed by the Baltic's success (or Poland's) - they might see things differently if even their "Ukrainian brothers" would turn richer than them - without the gas etc.. (call it wishful thinking, but my friend Dr. Andreas Umland hopes so). As long as Ukrainians failed (partly cuz Russia loved meddling in their politics. Ex-convict turned president Yanukovych was his toy.) all was fine. Since 2017 they can enter the EU without a visa - and work in Poland - while the "liberated" Donbass went south and even Crimeans were mostly disappointed. - Anyways, giving up power and influence is not something Putin likes to do. Who does?
3. Sadly, the Budapest Memorandum was not a security guarantee, but as the US so did Russia (and the UK) pledge: "A) ... not to invade Ukraine". (And other things Putin ignored.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
"is that China needs to see that things won’t be easy for it, if it ever tries to invade Taiwan."
If I was China I would look at the last year and conclude that Total War is inevitable. Some people think that the prospect of Total War will scare China, but if it's inevitable you might as well just prepare for it. It's obvious from Ukraine that covert support for color revolutions is strong and respect for spheres of influence is weak. China isn't going to get any stronger after 2028 relative to the west.
"In the meantime, we can respect the brave, effective fighting shown by Ukraine’s outnumbered soldiers."
The Ukrainians outnumber the Russians significantly. Russia had a material advantage early on but the west has evened that out for the most part.
I predict Ukraine will "win" this conflict, though life for Ukrainians will be worse no matter the outcome. They might even have been better off with a short loss. The obvious answer at this point is to declare the current front lines the new international border, but this does not serve western interests.
The odds of nuclear war are small, but think of the cost. People thought the Cuban Missile Crisis was brilliant statesmanship and then later we find out that a Russian sub came incredibly close to launching a nuke.
Here are my predictions as of now:
1. 50%
2. 25%
3. 15%
4. 5%
6. 5%
What are the odds that a peace treaty will include a commitment not to join the EU?
Thank you for an excellent article based upon facts and reason. I would quibble about a tiny part. You wrote, "But, the idea that fascists are a major force in Ukraine is ridiculous. Ukraine's President is Jewish."
Ashkenazi Jews have a genetic predisposition for Tay-Sachs disease. However, no Jews have a genetically inherited predisposition against fascism, as witnessed by those few Jews who equate 'chosen' with 'master race,' such as Meir Kahne and other ultra-nationalist Israeli Jews.
Really helpful insight into the situation!
"EU (which also requires member countries to defend each other.)"
The first page of the link refutes this
"the article does not say that the assistance should be military in nature, so countries such as Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden that have a policy of neutrality, can still cooperate"
thank-you for the perspective. my take is
1) putin had "planned" for this from 2014, realising he would have to make a stand but in reality, more of a decoy to deflect from the next stage of Russian economic growth. most likely outcome in next few months, crimea gets the water back on on a tariff basis, eastern republics stay neutral and UKR never joins NATO. all three very palatable to Western democracies given state of affairs in 2021. Averting a major war, but also weakening Russia future biz ties with west, UKR staying weak for many years as unable to join Euro bloc soon, unfortunate and avoidable for UKR...but what next for Russia?
2) All western investments in Russia are transferred to China and India, given their energy intensive growth models and strategies. Putin saw the renewable expansion in UK and Europe and realised this was the zenith of their share in energy to Europe, they werent winning any more wallet share and now is a good time to sale. He cant force a sale, but invading will force the corporations to do the bidding of Putin given popular sentiment is so completely apragmatic, and as they have, at a loss,. China will now pick up the firesale energy, India coal.
3) Russia and China going forward decide who gets what in Africa while everyone is looking to Europe. Russia influence extending over West Africa through French decline and China through the East of the continent.
4) Russia will play the role of partner to the silk road initiative and key resource supplier to India. Still able to participate in any Western development indirectly via the China economic expansion project and via the rapidly rising India development.
5) MSM pointing to Putin sentimentality over Kyiv as CHristian center (seen on Fox) or irate at NATO expansion, misunderstand Putin and is modus operandi completely. He is completely aware of NATO expansion for many years, he cares nothing for religion, the man is a trained counter-intel officer, a) they are picked because they are completely rational and high EQ and b) he survived and thrived so not only did he have those attributes, he excelled in them. Meaning, sentimentality or snapping are completely out of his makeup. The west have to realised that this early stage conflagration in UKR and all west reactions are very likely within all of his contingencies and west should start looking at to what his really after. Clearly if he isnt sending in the 100% airforce and just some low level conscripts, it wasnt to win UKR outright in a battle, but to let it drag on.....
Thanks for the on the scene reporting from Moscow
NATO is not a threat. NATO is a pact for mutual defense against lying, terrorist, murderous nations intent on subjugating and enslaving others. NATO has invaded no one. russia has in a murderous campaign to steal everything from the people of Ukraine, murder them, drive them out or put them on their knees. THe idea that they should ever get down on their knees and be neutral to the evil empire that is russia is disgusting.
Glad to see you writing on this. I'd like to spread an idea I hope policymakers are thinking of. The US should be sending drones to fight the Russians, sub rosa. Drones controlled from Kansas. No US soldiers will die. Russian soldiers will, but we'll have deniability, so the Russians will save face. If they want to accuse us and nuke Romania, they can, but they won't be pressured into that. When they shoot down drones, the Made in USA on them won't be evidence that we were operating them-- it could be we just gave them to the Ukrainians to use.
Just a thought.
After reading the article on The Hill about your findings or views, and reviewing your current survey of the situation, several questions come to mind. Do you have access to Ukrainian and Russian army Orders of Battle to more realistically analyze casualty reports and their effects on each side's readiness? Do you employ a conceptual framework for measuring success of each side's operational plans (EX: Principles of War, Centers of Gravity)? If Ukraine's overmatched army has successfully stalled a much larger force, what factors (leadership, training, motivation, external support - wpns like javelin, stinger) are the most decisive? Intel sources to date estimate around 7000 in 3 weeks yet only a handful of cities have fallen. The prize, Kiev, could revisit a repeat of Stalingrad. vmi74@aol.com
> appealing to Ukraine with high quality of life — just as the west did, to pull Ukraine into its orbit
What? 2014 was a violent coup, I think nobody denies that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity
> But, the idea that fascists are a major force in Ukraine is ridiculous.
They themselves seem to believe that ridiculous idea.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfaAyiP8Wuc
> Other Russian propaganda — such as the unsuccessful attempt to pretend Ukraine was starting the attack — also consists of grotesque lies.
You seem to be following the MSM narrative on the development of the war. According to other sources, it seems that a major portion of the Ukrainian army (60,000 personnel?) have been encircled in a so-called Russian "cauldron" in the East, while the Azof fighters are trapped in Mariupol. That so many forces were located in that region seems to give credence to the notion that they were preparing an attack on the Donbas and were prevented by the Russian first move.
> First, let’s note that Russia has displayed gross military incompetence,
As mentioned before, this is the MSM narrative. Other analysts who seem to know what they're talking about have a very different reading of the situation.
https://rumble.com/vwjdj5-col.-douglas-macgregor-has-advice-for-zelensky.-russias-cauldronsyria-strat.html
Unfortunately, you repeat some Russian propaganda in this piece: "Russia also supported violent separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions." That was always a Russian military operation, not separatists. As the early leader of the operation, Strelkov, famously said over an open radio frequency: "the Ukrainians won't fight." It was always "little green men" (Russian soldiers with their patches taken off) doing the fighting.
Also, I believe you put a Russian-propaganda spin on Ukraine joining NATO. Putin never believed there was a threat that the west would invade Russia. He just always wanted to take back Ukraine for Russia, and knew NATO membership would prevent that (and the same with other former holdings of Russia/Soviet Union).