Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Legbiter]

Zelenskiy returning from meetings with more support from Italy, Germany, France and the UK - and reporters are saying that tonight's seen intense attack on Kyiv with the loudest/most active air defence in a long time.

France promised to give their version of the Storm Shadow to Ukrainians plus start fighter pilot training. So the British shove seems to have worked.  

[DGuller]

Ukrainians even claimed three shootdowns of Russian supercum.  Now that's impressive.

[Legbiter]

Ukrainians even claimed three shootdowns of Russian supercum.

Googling this returned impressive results but not wrt to Russian missiles.

[The Minsky Moment]

Ukrainians claim to have shot down six hypersonic Kynzhal missiles.  I presume all the missiles were aimed at the Patriot system.  Russians claim to have destroyed the Patriot system.

NYT quotes Russkies as saying

Russia's Defense Ministry said that at least one Kinzhal was used in the attack, which it claimed was a "concentrated strike" involving high-precision long-range weapons that hit "all assigned targets."

That translates as failure.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Been a while since I have read into the newest generation Patriot systems, but I don't think they could really reliably shoot down true hypersonic weapons. Makes me think the Kinzhals weren't really traveling at hypersonic speeds (and may not even be able to in a reliable way.)

[grumbler]

Weird piece in the Sun about how its "shocking video" shows a Patriot battery being destroyed, when the video shows nothing of the sort.  What's not shocking is that the Sun is using its usual bullshit to try to drive up clicks.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I wouldn't be shocked if some element of the battery was damaged, but hard to say from the current quality of reporting.

[Josquius]

Been a while since I have read into the newest generation Patriot systems, but I don't think they could really reliably shoot down true hypersonic weapons. Makes me think the Kinzhals weren't really traveling at hypersonic speeds (and may not even be able to in a reliable way.)

I've certainly read recent analysis saying they're not real hypersonic missiles.
Something about most modern missiles reaching hypersonic speeds and the difference being steering at that speed. Which they don't do.

[Sheilbh]

Weird piece in the Sun about how its "shocking video" shows a Patriot battery being destroyed, when the video shows nothing of the sort.  What's not shocking is that the Sun is using its usual bullshit to try to drive up clicks.

Maybe, but also


I'm now seeing lots of explainers of how damaged doesn't mean destroyed/how difficut they are to destroy etc

France promised to give their version of the Storm Shadow to Ukrainians plus start fighter pilot training. So the British shove seems to have worked.  

I've said it before but I think France might be the most under-rated/under the radar supporter of Ukraine. Given the equipment we know and the way Ukrainian officials talk about it I think they're a very significant backer, but they don't make almost any of it public. Not fully sure why.

[Jacob]

I've said it before but I think France might be the most under-rated/under the radar supporter of Ukraine. Given the equipment we know and the way Ukrainian officials talk about it I think they're a very significant backer, but they don't make almost any of it public. Not fully sure why.

The tautological answer is "because they don't particularly care to build a perception that they're doing so much."

I can imagine a few different reasons (and this is all theoretical):

1. Their priority is defeating Russia without escalating and they believe lots of PR can increase the risk of escalation for little practical gain.

2. Stylistically France and/ or Macron prefer less talking about foreign policy and military matters in general. There are a few ways to frame that I think, but it could simply be a matter of temperament.

3. Domestically there are few gains from talking big about supporting Ukraine, and internationally it's less about what foreign populations think (who don't know what France is doing) and more about what foreign leaders think (and they'll know).

4. They think there's genuine operational advantage to not announce their support as the Russians will have less intel to go on.

... again, I don't know I'm just speculating.

[Josquius]

I suppose it'll also be good come election on time to have a big story on how much France helped ukraine beat off the fascists.

[Sheilbh]

The tautological answer is "because they don't particularly care to build a perception that they're doing so much."

I can imagine a few different reasons (and this is all theoretical):

1. Their priority is defeating Russia without escalating and they believe lots of PR can increase the risk of escalation for little practical gain.

2. Stylistically France and/ or Macron prefer less talking about foreign policy and military matters in general. There are a few ways to frame that I think, but it could simply be a matter of temperament.

3. Domestically there are few gains from talking big about supporting Ukraine, and internationally it's less about what foreign populations think (who don't know what France is doing) and more about what foreign leaders think (and they'll know).

4. They think there's genuine operational advantage to not announce their support as the Russians will have less intel to go on.

... again, I don't know I'm just speculating.

I think all of those are possible - I think there could also simply be a culture that prefers vagueness on military issues. A bit like in the UK the government never says anything about the intelligence services - whatever the question, whatever the issue the line of the UK government is always "we don't comment on intelligence issues". I wonder if there may be a similar culture in France around providing this type of support or even their own military deployments that they deliberately keep it vague.

I've also read that Macron has concluded that France has lost the publicity battle on support for Ukraine - but is absolutely determined to win it on reconstructing Ukraine after the war. So it may simply be that he doesn't want to spend time fighting a perception battle that's already lost.

Obviously I think you can contest some of those possibilities - for example I think there's a genuine operational upside to very visible support to Ukraine in both a psy-op-y way for Russian soldiers (who are all on Telegram) but also as a very clear message to the Russian leadership. But that is all very arguable.

I wonder how it works practically because one of the reasons we have a rough idea of how much the UK, Germany, US are spending on support to Ukraine (separate from actual weapons systems) is because of budgets and spending reports in the legislatures. I'm not sure how it works in France because I am 100% they've spent/sent a lot more than the €650 million military aid that's been reported

[grumbler]

I've certainly read recent analysis saying they're not real hypersonic missiles.
Something about most modern missiles reaching hypersonic speeds and the difference being steering at that speed. Which they don't do.

All modern SAMs are hypersonic at least up through motor burnout.  But hypersonic and Mach 10 are not the same thing. I'd be surprised if the Kinzhal cruises at Mach 10, as claimed, and if it has any but an inertial guidance system it isn't going to be going hypersonic when it searches for its target.  It could be hypersonic in terminal mode.

[Syt]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/hungary-blocks-next-tranche-eu-off-budget-military-support-ukraine-2023-05-16/

Hungary blocks next tranche of EU off-budget military support for Ukraine

BUDAPEST, May 16 (Reuters) - Hungary did not approve the disbursement of the next tranche of military support for Ukraine provided under the EU's European Peace Facility (EPF), a government spokesman's office said on Tuesday.

The EPF, created in 2021, is an off-budget instrument aimed at enhancing the EU's ability to prevent conflicts, build peace and strengthen international security.

"Hungary does not agree with the fact that the European Union, along with other existing tools, uses the European Peace Facility solely with regard to Ukraine as this does not allow sufficient funds to be channelled to promote the EU's interests in other areas," the government spokesman's office said in an email response to Reuters about an Italian media report on the matter.

It said other areas where the funds could be used included the Balkans or North Africa.

"For the Hungarian government it is crucial that these issues should be clarified, and that's why it did not approve the disbursement of the next tranche from the EPF," the spokesman's office added.

The EU has provided a total of about 3.6 billion euros for military support for Ukraine so far under the EPF.

Hungary, which is member of the EU and also NATO, has refused to provide any military equipment to its neighbour Ukraine, which was invaded by Russian forces in February 2022.

Hungary has also repeatedly criticised EU sanctions against Russia, which all 27 EU countries must also unanimously approve, but eventually supported all the agreed measures so far.

Hungary has been in a dispute with Brussels, as the bloc has suspended any payments of EU recovery funds until Budapest's nationalist government implements reforms to improve judicial independence and tackle corruption.

In power since 2010, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has clashed with the EU and its executive arm, the European Commission, over Budapest restricting the rights of migrants, as well as tightening state controls over non-governmental organizations, academics, media and courts.

[celedhring]

I mean, why? At this point, the only thing they're achieveing is pissing off Poland, who's their major ally inside the EU (yes, I'm aware that push comes to shove, they'll still support each other). Unless Putin has Kompromat on Orbán, all of this seems pointless self-defeating posturing.