Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Jacob]

Interesting on Mark Galleoti podcast that he talked about articles in the Russian press. They're not necessarily dicatated by the Kremlin but are all in a controlled media space and his analysis was it sounds a lot like they're almost trying to convince themselves that the West is about to give up on Ukraine and do a deal with Russia. The terms of those deals are basically full Novorossiya (including Odessa) plus a neutral buffer Ukraine.

His take was that Ukraine fatigue is not just a Western phenomenon. Russian official sources are also trying to reassure themselves that any day now there'll be a deal that Putin could try to claim as victory.

It's not going to happen obviously for all the reasons we've talked about. But flagged the mood might shift from that hope after the winter - Russia will have their presidential electioin which will be a big target for Ukrainian operations inside Russia and the mud will freeze so there'll be a resumption of Ukrainian offensives.

That's interesting.

I mean, it makes sense that there's been a general wear and tear in the will to fight for everyone involved - Ukraine, the West, but also Russia.

[Josquius]

Things don't sound good from the US. Ive heard it said in a few places the US doesn't even want the Ukraine to win, they're afraid of what happens if Russia collapses. They want to avoid Ukraine losing but not give them enough to actually push back the invaders.

Newsweek is maybe the most prominent starting on this line

https://www.newsweek.com/us-want-ukraine-defeat-russia-putin-biden-zelensky-peace-talks-1846772

[Jacob]

What's the source of that, Josq?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

It does seem to be a bit of the mood though. Have heard similar defeatist chirpings in our press and from a few of our politicians (luckily still only the traitorous ones)

Seems to me that the obvious retort, politely of course, to western politicians is if they would have been willing to negotiate with the Central or Axis Powers in 1916 or 1942 respectively. And if their answer is 'no', ask them why and then conclude with saying that's the reason why Ukraine can't give in.

[Josquius]

I wouldn't say it's defeatist. Quite the opposite. Its highlighting that just holding the line isn't enough. We need to give Ukraine that bit extra needed to win.
I could see a cynical real politik argument for Russia being permanently mired in an unwinnable war in Ukraine.
But the fear of Russia collapsing... That seems mad to me. There should be forces ready to intervene if something very dodgy were to happen threatening nuclear weapons. But otherwise let the Russian empire collapse. If its people want to be free then they deserve every encouragement - and before we get anywhere near this point restoring normal life to Ukraine is a must.

As to negotiation with Russia.. I hold to what I said much earlier in the thread there. Negotiating with russia is fine. But any peace deal needs to involve their troops out of Ukraine.
Properly ran referenda for the occupied regions in their future are something to put on the table. I support this. Annexations absolutely not.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I mean the people urging for 'negotiations'

[Sheilbh]

But the fear of Russia collapsing... That seems mad to me. There should be forces ready to intervene if something very dodgy were to happen threatening nuclear weapons. But otherwise let the Russian empire collapse. If its people want to be free then they deserve every encouragement - and before we get anywhere near this point restoring normal life to Ukraine is a must.

Well - 1905, WW1, Afghanistan. There is form in Russia facing very significant political turmoil/challenges from perceived failures in war especially with high casualties.

In those cases I think wars basically have a history of causing a crisis of legitimacy for an authoritarian system. I don't think that's an impossible outcome here. The idea the US/West and Russia are in any position to negotiate Ukraine I think is mad given the last 9 years. Obviously it's also profoundly immoral (in the way that Russia is comfortable with and would accuse the West of being hypocritical about).

I think the "decolonise Russia" stuff is absolute nonsense.

As to negotiation with Russia.. I hold to what I said much earlier in the thread there. Negotiating with russia is fine. But any peace deal needs to involve their troops out of Ukraine.

Also negotiation by Ukraine and Russia - which is normally absent in the Russian press version of this endgame. It's basically the West is getting bored and there are divisions between Ukraine and the West (both true, to an extent), so the West will make a deal and without Western backing Ukraine will fold and do what it's told. As we've talked about before I think that is not an accurate read on what's going on or likely to happen.

It's the thing I find most interesting is that the Western and Russian versions on this are so aligned. I wonder which came first? Is it Russian commentary on what they're reading Western analysts say - but there it means "we're about to win", which may disappoint if they don't; or the West reflecting back Russian thinking.

As I say the big absence in both is Ukraine and Ukrainians as agents in their own history.

I think the flag on deep winter is going to be interesting for the reasons Galleoti flagged. The mud will freeze so Ukraine will probably be inflicting Russian casualties; Ukrainian forces will be upping their attacks within Russia during the presidential campaign; that campaign will also serve as a focus for attention for any internal dissent - and then there'll be the next years draft notices. It strikes me as potentially pretty compustible.

[Jacob]

This is obviously not going to carry it, but Denmark just locked in the budgets for supporting Ukraine until 2027 at a similar scale (increasing a bit, I think) as until now.

Wouldn't be a bad signal for other democracies supporting Ukraine to do the same, where possible.

[Zoupa]

My 0.02$:

russia will not end the war until their army collapses. I don't think their army collapses by some brilliant maneuver or breakthrough from the Ukrainians. In any case, as we've seen, breakthroughs are impossible on the current frontline.

I think their army collapses when the conditions in terms of supplies and casualties get to a tipping point. Hence ATACMs, F-16s, blowing up Kerch bridge, partisans actions within russia etc.

It's not as sexy as driving on your tanks to liberate villages, but it's the only way this ends with a Ukrainian victory.

[Josquius]

The Russian army sounds seriously fucked. Morale in the toilet. People from the regions, heavily minorities, rounded up and basically shipped right to the front where they're told to charge or else. Reliable reporting from British intelligence mentions barrier troops 10km behind the front.
It does seem liable for something breaking....but how?
What I've not heard much of is how morale is amongst those barrier troops, or who they are even.

I think the "decolonise Russia" stuff is absolute nonsense.
 

How so?
We've seen the chechens desire for this, heavy rumblings from the Bashkors, then there's the tartars...
It isn't getting much press reporting, so who knows how true it is, but lots of rumours of stuff randomly exploding, trains detailing, and so on in parts of Russia. Obviously Russia doesn't want to advertise it so really shady thing to try to get to the bottom of.

Given many of these groups are central Asian, Muslim, and Turkish, I do wonder whether Turkey will be playing a game there.

What's the source of that, Josq?

Guess I was slow with the edit? Newsweek linked there.

[Legbiter]

Finns just closed the last border crossing.

Finland will close all land borders with Russia after Helsinki accused Moscow of deliberately orchestrating a surge in asylum seekers as part of an "influence" operation.

Following an extraordinary cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Finland announced that it would close Raja-Jooseppi in the far north, its last remaining border crossing with Russia, from Thursday until December 13.

https://archive.vn/qtD7x#selection-2207.0-2241.188

[Tamas]

My 0.02$:

russia will not end the war until their army collapses. I don't think their army collapses by some brilliant maneuver or breakthrough from the Ukrainians. In any case, as we've seen, breakthroughs are impossible on the current frontline.

I think their army collapses when the conditions in terms of supplies and casualties get to a tipping point. Hence ATACMs, F-16s, blowing up Kerch bridge, partisans actions within russia etc.

It's not as sexy as driving on your tanks to liberate villages, but it's the only way this ends with a Ukrainian victory.

Yes I think they need to study Russia in WW1 and how Germans were smart enough to kick them but careful not to trigger patriotic fervour.

[PJL]

My 0.02$:

russia will not end the war until their army collapses. I don't think their army collapses by some brilliant maneuver or breakthrough from the Ukrainians. In any case, as we've seen, breakthroughs are impossible on the current frontline.

I think their army collapses when the conditions in terms of supplies and casualties get to a tipping point. Hence ATACMs, F-16s, blowing up Kerch bridge, partisans actions within russia etc.

It's not as sexy as driving on your tanks to liberate villages, but it's the only way this ends with a Ukrainian victory.

Yes I think they need to study Russia in WW1 and how Germans were smart enough to kick them but careful not to trigger patriotic fervour.

But not as dumb as like supporting political extremists in Russia which Germany also did by sending Lenin there in a sealed train. That bit them in the butt later on.

[jimmy olsen]

[Tonitrus]

Things don't sound good from the US. Ive heard it said in a few places the US doesn't even want the Ukraine to win, they're afraid of what happens if Russia collapses. They want to avoid Ukraine losing but not give them enough to actually push back the invaders.

I am not completely unsympathetic to that point of view...a Russian collapse gets very dangerous with nukes (and who controls/doesn't control them) involved.  I think we sometimes forget how miraculously bloodless/destruction-less the USSR collapse was vs. what it easily could have been.