Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[OttoVonBismarck]

Europe is such a powerful economy I really won't feel much sympathy if there is a scenario where America abandons them and they end up in trouble. There have been people warning about this as a major problem ever since the end of the Cold War, and most European leaders simply refuse to accept that security is meaningfully important, or that anything might need to change fundamentally--just because a thing was true in the past doesn't mean it always will be.

That being said I obviously would prefer a scenario where America maintains its alliances.

[The Brain]

Maybe the UK should have gone for an independent nuclear capability. Ah well.

[Sheilbh]

Yet again pointing to the unavoidable conclusion that France is again, as it's been, with some digressions, since 1789, right

[OttoVonBismarck]

France is smart on some things, like it is generally wise they developed their own nukes and separate command structure from being "part of NATO", but they also have some shortcomings that make it hard for them to be leaders of pushing for a Euro-wide alternative to the U.S., namely France's own egotism and desire to dominate and the reality it isn't a big enough power for the rest of Europe to allow that.

[crazy canuck]

It was not so long ago, that my posts in this thread, saying that it was not so far-fetched that Russia would win the war in Ukraine was greeted with a great deal of scepticism and outright hostility.

It's been pretty clear for quite a while that the west does not have the stomach for this conflict.  That became abundantly clear when all the US news outlets talked about the need for a quick Ukraine victory.

Now we are faced with two significant crisis, both of which require mobilization the likes of which we haven't seen since World War II. The climate disaster which has retreated from all of the headlines and now this military disaster.  The thing they have in common is they are slow moving train wrecks which might still be stopped, but it's doubtful.

[Valmy]

It was not so long ago, that my posts in this thread, saying that it was not so far-fetched that Russia would win the war in Ukraine was greeted with a great deal of scepticism and outright hostility.

Weird. I thought I said that Russia might eventually grind out a "win" but really what will they win? A few more impoverished provinces in a country already had all the same problems Russia had but more so? Seems to me that just by having to grind it out in years of bloody attritional war they kind of already have lost. And millions of people have fled Russia on top of all their other losses. I don't recall getting much push back from those ideas. But anyway I don't think this is a disaster. A quick collapse of Ukraine in 2022 might have been a disaster.

Granted that is kind of a realpolitik perspective. Obviously I would vastly prefer Ukraine win and win quickly.

From a realpolitik perspective I am concerned that our allies in Europe don't seem to be getting the message that they need to take on a large responsibility for their own defense. Or they have gotten that message but have decided to just kind of...not do it anyway. The United States has been pretty clear that it wants to focus primarily on Asia going forward for a pretty long time now. And then there is a the fact that we are, and have been, politically unstable for almost a decade now.

The climate disaster which has retreated from all of the headlines and now this military disaster.

You sure? The climate stuff still seems as topical as it has been in the past. Granted, not a high bar.

[Josquius]

France is smart on some things, like it is generally wise they developed their own nukes and separate command structure from being "part of NATO", but they also have some shortcomings that make it hard for them to be leaders of pushing for a Euro-wide alternative to the U.S., namely France's own egotism and desire to dominate and the reality it isn't a big enough power for the rest of Europe to allow that.

France fucks up a lot by insisting France should be the centre of the universe.
Its more that France is almost professionally contrarian and when the others are making a mistake this means they're sometimes right.

It was not so long ago, that my posts in this thread, saying that it was not so far-fetched that Russia would win the war in Ukraine was greeted with a great deal of scepticism and outright hostility.

It's been pretty clear for quite a while that the west does not have the stomach for this conflict.  That became abundantly clear when all the US news outlets talked about the need for a quick Ukraine victory.

Now we are faced with two significant crisis, both of which require mobilization the likes of which we haven't seen since World War II. The climate disaster which has retreated from all of the headlines and now this military disaster.  The thing they have in common is they are slow moving train wrecks which might still be stopped, but it's doubtful.

Understandably its not really a concern to countries fighting a war for survival, and given there's a lot of human suffering too I feel terrible for it, but the climate issue of the Ukraine war always sticks out to me.
When I hear of vast amounts of materiel or oil just being destroyed.... so much waste. So much manufacturing and pollution for nothing.

The way military matters have completely taken over the discourse (thanks to our failure to not support Ukraine early) and any concern for the climate has completely dropped off...  It really does bring to mind what someone said some months ago about how we're living in the montage at the start of a post apocalyptic film. Right when the world should be working together to save the entire planet we're instead squabbling over petty nonsense of who has the biggest national penis.

Russia of course has never cared about the climate. More than that it could even be said they're pro climate change as they stand to be a 'winner' in many ways and lose much less than others overall. So as much as the war has been a disaster for them overall, even if they seize their claimed provinces completely in a peace treaty, there does seem to be a lot of winning for them.

[Sheilbh]

It was not so long ago, that my posts in this thread, saying that it was not so far-fetched that Russia would win the war in Ukraine was greeted with a great deal of scepticism and outright hostility.

It's been pretty clear for quite a while that the west does not have the stomach for this conflict.  That became abundantly clear when all the US news outlets talked about the need for a quick Ukraine victory.

I still disagree on this.

I don't think Russia is capable of achieving their war goals, and that Ukraine wwould then make peace, and I don't think Russia is capable of effectively compelling Ukraine to make peace on its terms. In part for some of the same reasons I think Ukraine can't breakthrough. From what I've read Russian soldiers do have morale and are willing to fight on the deensive, but also (and I know I bang on about this) but I think in this sort of conflict the cheap, mass-produced, commercially available drones with cameras have had a big impact in favour of defenders.

On Ukraine specifically I would just note that I'm worried by what I've read about the Zelenskiy-Zaluzhny disagreements. In particular that Zelenskiy apparently thinks Zaluzhny is too timid, but also is not willing to support a wider mobilisation for political reason. Obviously we should still be sending everything we can and ramping up production etc (as much as anything else for Europe's re-arming) but I just think that reporting from Kyiv is, I think, concerning.

But there is overwhelming popular support in Europe to support Ukraine (and it's got 75% support in American polls). So I think the will and capacity is there but there needs to be urgency and Europe's making multi-billion commitments for multiple years at the EU level (in the UK, though we're nowhere near as important but could do more, all parties are committed to maintaining or increasing spending on support). We need to move that into capital investment in new factories and training new workers etc.

I don't think the issue in Europe is stomach, so much as it is the same problem Europe always has whenever you talk about foreign policy or defence which is that there is no "European" risk perception or strategy. Finland is becoming one of Europe's leading manufacturers of military equipment; Poland is re-arming (having doubled their defence budget) with new factories from German, British, French, American and South Korean arms companies to support that; the Baltics are taking similar steps. On that edge of Europe the risk still feels existential, I think outside of that area support is high and the money is allocated but there's no sense of urgency. The context is that since 2020 my understanding is that defence from Europe has increased and is still climbing:


I also think that bluntly there needs to be a culture change in the big Western European military spending approaches. My impression is France generally gets things right - but I don't know. In the UK we have a lot of disastrous defence procurement horror stories - normally involving massive over-engineering and very bespoke products and I think we need to move to a "good enough" approach that is more easily scalable and can support Ukraine (and others in Europe). I think Germany is even worse - I've mentioned before that as a proportion of GDP, Germany's spending is lower but in raw numbers their defence budget is similar to France or Britain. But their output for that in terms of deployable, useable military forces is vastly lower. I don't know but I think part of that, from what I've read, also ties to some Bundeswehr procurement disasters.

And that is slightly the counter to Jos' point. Europe outspends Russia four times on defence. In principle if there was a genuine "European" strategy/view of risk in their neighbourhood it would make perfect sense and you'd get efficiency and scale from consolidating that. I think at the moment there is equal risk that you actually just get a massive continental level of Bundeswehr spending which doesn't have much "bang" for its buck. So I think that also needs to be fixed.

The other point on Europe and the US and NATO is nuclear deterrence. And fundamentally I don't know if there's an answer to that at this point.

[Duque de Bragança]

I would have thought Turkey spent more, given their troubled situation both inside and outside their borders.

[crazy canuck]

@Shielbh, there was a story in our news this morning that the federal government is " seriously looking at" proposals for increasing munitions manufacturing.  But the reporter dug into the story, a bit deeper and found that the proposal was made a couple months into the war and the government is still seriously looking at it.

I suspect that story could be replicated in many of the NATO nations.

[Sheilbh]

Totally agree. I fear you're right.

The hope it won't be is that, ultimately, Canada's an ocean away, which should concentrate European minds more. What Canada (and the US) can afford, I don't think is possible for Europe.

[Zoupa]

@Sheilbh: Zelenskyy fired Zaluzhnyi about 2 weeks ago, replacing him with Oleksandr Syrskyi. A move that was widely panned by soldiers themselves, to put it mildly.

[Sheilbh]

@Sheilbh: Zelenskyy fired Zaluzhnyi about 2 weeks ago, replacing him with Oleksandr Syrskyi. A move that was widely panned by soldiers themselves, to put it mildly.

Yeah sorry I did know that as well. I saw the first firing with I think popular and soldiers complaints forcing Zelenskiy to temporarily back down. I hadn't realised the soliders were not still not happy about it.

But I think it's the disagreement that worries me: Zelenskiy wanting to push for a more aggressive prosecution of the war with maximum goals, while not being willing to further mobilise for political reasons. I could be wrong but that tension/contradiction feels like something that could grow and be a real problem.

I've been very strongly supportive of him and think we should send everything. But that seems like a concern.

[HVC]

@Sheilbh: Zelenskyy fired Zaluzhnyi about 2 weeks ago, replacing him with Oleksandr Syrskyi. A move that was widely panned by soldiers themselves, to put it mildly.

What was the reasoning? Good old fashioned corruption? Or has it reached the inevitable power struggle phase that governments in that area always seem to reach?

[Grey Fox]

Totally agree. I fear you're right.

The hope it won't be is that, ultimately, Canada's an ocean away, which should concentrate European minds more. What Canada (and the US) can afford, I don't think is possible for Europe.

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/info/videos/1-8894434/canada-en-fait-il-assez-pour-aider-ukraine

Here's a Radio-Canada video about what we're doing(or failing to do). Simply put, we don't have an industry or stock of anything. Canada gave Ukraine all the none-training 777 and all of the working Leopard 2s.

Military procurement thru the USA is slow.