Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[The Minsky Moment]

Sever econoic sanctions. Refuse to purchase gas.

That's a decision for individual European importers.  The short term economic cost would be heavy. Who would/could coordinate such a response.

I agree this would be effective and anything short of that is just playing around.  But is it realistic?

Start sending arms to the Ukraine.

Have they even requested that? Would it be useful - my impression was that Ukrainian military deficiencies have less to do with arms and more to do with the shortage of reliable and well-trained formations.  What would we send?  Isn't Ukrainian kit mostly Russian-made?  Have Ukrainian troops any experience or training using US/NATO gear?

Publicly and loudly prove to the world that we know Russians are inside the Ukraine. Call this what is is - a war of aggression against a sovereign nation.

Ok, sure.  Then Putin calls the bluff and says no, this is all lies and propaganda.  Then what?

I do, however, think that it's probably the best course of action (or reasonable facsimile thereof) given the circumstances, though I'd like a little more teeth on the sanctions and some slightly less mealy mouthed words out of the Europeans.

Well yeah sure.  But "Europe" struggles mightily to achieve even a bare semblance of economic coordination, and then only in extremis.  So how realistic is it to expect a strong, unified response on foreign policy where the member states don't have consistent interests?  The NATO structure doesn't really help because it is an alliance for collective security, and Ukraine is outside.  Recall how long it took for NATO to get into gear in Yugoslavia - that was when Russia was incredibly weak, and even then it was a slow and messy process.

[The Minsky Moment]

Either they are there, in which case US/NATO intelligence assets (read: satellite surveillance) certainly is aware of it, or they are not, in which case US/NATO surveillance ability know about that as well.

But so far the US and NATO have been reluctant to go public with proofs of Russian action that would reveal sources/methods.  So even if "we" know, Putin can retain public deniability and even the Western media must hedge somewhat.

[CountDeMoney]

That may be, but it isn't stopping them.  The point of sanctions isn't to punish the Russian people.  It's to dissuade the leadership from aggressive actions.

I thought the point of sanctions was to punish the people so they put pressure on their leadership? Either way Putin won't be swayed by the public and his rich buddies are nowhere near hurting.

Yeah, never underestimate Russians' capacity to swallow their own bullshit.

[Martinus]

Since NATO includes the US, that is trivially true.

But that isn't the point, unless you are just wanting to reinforce the fact that NATO, by and large, has been relying almost completely on the US for defense for some time now, and more recently (the last couple of decades) has almost completely abandoned even a pretext of keeping up their end of the bargain, even as limited as that end was...

I know you're speaking generally and in aggregate, and that the Germans and others weigh heavily there, but I like to think that Canada, Denmark, and the UK are generally keeping up their end of the bargain (or at the very least keeping up the pretext, as you say)?

You forgot Poland.

[Viking]

Still, I would be surprised if NATO minus the US doesn't outspend Russia. It's more inefficient than if it was a sole country, of course. But as an European federalist that pushes my agenda .

Russia about 60b
France/Britain/Germany 40b
Italy 30b

[Martinus]

Well, yesterday one of the Russian politicians who are on the "black list" (Speaker of the Russian Parliament I believe) was feted on a state visit in Paris. Is this reporter anywhere? Is anyone making a stink?

[Martinus]

Well yeah sure.  But "Europe" struggles mightily to achieve even a bare semblance of economic coordination, and then only in extremis.  So how realistic is it to expect a strong, unified response on foreign policy where the member states don't have consistent interests?  The NATO structure doesn't really help because it is an alliance for collective security, and Ukraine is outside.  Recall how long it took for NATO to get into gear in Yugoslavia - that was when Russia was incredibly weak, and even then it was a slow and messy process.

Yup. To give you a bit of a different perspective, the biggest failure from the Poland's point of view is the Obama administration - we know that France and Germany will not do shit because they have strong economic ties with Russia, and the UK is likewise on the fence, but lack of any serious sanctions from the US means that nobody else will do much (Poland and the Baltics alone would not go against Russia, even if we wanted, because we are afraid of not just being ineffective - and we are already paying the biggest price for the Russian embargo on Western foodstuffs but being invaded - and I don't think anyone seriously thinks NATO would come to help us). But the US could effectively force the entire Western world's hand by adopting sweeping sanctions like it did with Iran (and as much as French and Germans like doing business with Russia, their firms cannot afford being cut off from US financial markets).

In short, at least this part of Europe would want nothing more than the USA's unilateral action - but unfortunately your Peace Prize winner is not going to do anything as rash, is he?

[jimmy olsen]

If this goes through it sounds like it would instantly plunge Russia into a deep recession. Germans will probably wuss out on it though.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-plan-cut-off-russian-141728130.html

The UK Has A Plan To Cut Off Russian Businesses From The Rest Of The World
Business Insider
By Brett LoGiurato September 1, 2014 10:17 AM

The United Kingdom will push the European Union this weekend to consider the most punitive sanctions yet against Russia for its involvement in escalating the crisis in Ukraine.

According to Bloomberg, the U.K. plans to propose blocking Russia from the SWIFT banking transaction system, a move analysts say would effectively cut off Russian businesses from the rest of the world's financial system. U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron will put forward the proposal during a meeting with E.U. leaders in Brussels on Saturday.

"This would be a major escalation of the sanctions. Most international payments flow through SWIFT. Banning Russian banks and companies from SWIFT would effectively cut off Russian businesses from the rest of world," said Bruce Johnston, a London-based analyst at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.

"It would also have a major impact on European businesses who need to paid by Russians, and want to consume Russian energy."

The move would have a significant effect on Russia's banking sector, as many financial institutions across the world use the system. According to SWIFT's website, it transmitted more than 21 million financial messages per day in July. It helped process payments among more than 10,500 financial institutions and corporations across 215 different countries.

Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the  Foundation for Defense of Democracies, compared the potential move to one leveled on Iranian institutions in 2012.

"SWIFT is the electronic bloodstream of the global financial system," he told Business Insider in an email. "Cancelling Putin's credit card could have far reaching consequences for the Russian economy as Iran discovered when scores of its financial institutions were expelled from SWIFT in 2012."

David Cameron will propose blocking Russia from the SWIFT network.

The U.S. and E.U. have imposed multiple rounds of sanctions on Russia over the conflict in Ukraine. Most recently last month, they leveled targeted sanctions on Russia's energy, arms, and finance sectors. But so far, the sanctions have not changed the calculus of Russia or President Vladimir Putin.

This week, the conflict has sharply escalated, as Ukraine, NATO, and the West said Russia sent troops across the border to fight with pro-Russian separatist rebels in eastern regions of the country.

This week, the rebels have opened a new front  in the cities of Amvrosiivka and Starobeshevo. One  fear is that Russia is attempting to create a land link between Russia and the strategic peninsula of Crimea, which Russia annexed with special forces troops in March. Poroshenko said Russian t roops are  leading  a separatist counteroffensive in the east, bringing in tanks and firing artillery from inside Ukrainian territory.

President Barack Obama and European leaders have agreed on the need for new "costs" in the wake of the latest escalation, but officials in both areas are questioning the legitimacy of the strategy. In the U.S., multiple Republican lawmakers have called on Obama to provide military assistance to Ukraine, saying a political resolution to the conflict is not possible if Russia continues to pursue its goals through military means.

In Europe, geopolitical expert Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group told Business Insider he expected there to be high-profile breaks among leaders on the sanctions strategy.

"It's hard to see the west holding off for much longer in not calling Russian forces an invasion. That leads to more 'level 3' (sector wide) sanctions on Russia, yes, but we'll now see a real fragmentation of European leaders publicly calling the policy a failure and looking to break from further coordination," Bremmer said.

"After all, many Europeans have been deeply skeptical of Russian sanctions from the beginning, and to the extent that the purpose of sanctions was to prevent an invasion. That's clearly failed."

Senior Obama administration officials declined to comment about possible new sanctions on Russia during a conference call with reporters Friday about new sanctions leveled on individuals and businesses in relation to Iran's nuclear program. An administration official did not immediately respond to a subsequent request for comment.

[Syt]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29042561

BREAKING NEWS: Ukraine 'agrees truce' with Putin

Ukrainian president says he has agreed with Russia's President Putin on "permanent ceasefire" in east of country.

More to follow.

[celedhring]

But... but... I was told that Russia had nothing to do with the rebellion in the East, how can Putin agree to a truce in their behalf? 

Anyway, more seriously, I hope this works.

[Syt]

But... but... I was told that Russia had nothing to do with the rebellion in the East, how can Putin agree to a truce in their behalf? 

Well, maybe the separatists will continue the good fight, nevertheless, because they find Kiev in violation of the agreement, somehow? Because maybe some Right Sector idiots can't leave it be? Which then allows Moscow to say, "See? They're the bad guys!"?

[Tamas]

But... but... I was told that Russia had nothing to do with the rebellion in the East, how can Putin agree to a truce in their behalf? 

Well, maybe the separatists will continue the good fight, nevertheless, because they find Kiev in violation of the agreement, somehow? Because maybe some Right Sector idiots can't leave it be? Which then allows Moscow to say, "See? They're the bad guys!"?

Yeah at this point it is impossible to tell if this is genuine or just the next episode in Operation Total Confusion the Russians have been running. Putin and cronies have been saying one thing one day just to say the exact opposite a day later, then turn the tables again in a few days. It has been working great, as everyone is confused and intimidated, all the while Russian interests are being advanced via force of arms.

[Syt]

http://en.itar-tass.com/world/747831

Putin, Poroshenko agree on ceasefire steps "to a large extent"

Moscow has repeatedly pointed out that Russia is not a party to Ukraine's internal conflict

   
ULAN-BATOR, September 03. /ITAR-TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Petro Poroshenko have agreed "to a large extent" on steps to be taken by the Ukrainian military and militias to achieve a ceasefire, Russian presidential press-secretary Dmitry Peskov has said.

"In a telephone conversation earlier in the day Putin and Poroshenko exchanged opinions and to a large extent agreed on steps that might contribute to an early ceasefire between the Ukrainian military and the militias in the southeast of the country," Peskov said in the wake of a statement by the Ukrainian presidential press-service "the conversation resulted in a permanent ceasefire in Donbass."

Moscow has repeatedly pointed out that Russia is not a party to Ukraine's internal conflict. This is precisely what President Putin emphasized after last week's negotiations with Poroshenko in Minsk.

"Frankly speaking, we are not in the position to discuss any ceasefire terms or likely agreements between Kiev, Donetsk and Luhansk. That's none of our business but Ukraine's internal affair," Putin said. 

Earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart Petro Poroshenko.

"[The two leaders] continued to discuss Ukraine's military and humanitarian crisis," Peskov said.

"The heads of state exchanged their views on top priority measures for stopping the bloodshed in that country's south-east," the press secretary said. "[Putin's] view on possible ways out of this crisis situation largely coincides with that of the Ukrainian president."

Overnight to August 27, after consultations involving Customs Union, Ukraine and the EU, a meeting between the presidents of Russia and Ukraine took place in Minsk. The conversation behind closed doors lasted for almost two hours and became the first negotiations between the two leaders.

[Syt]

Separatist in Donetsk:

[DontSayBanana]

Actually, yeah, Putin would want to distance himself from imagery like that.  While it's a decently effective domestic tool to wax nostalgic about the old Soviet Union days, if an actual return were to happen, the devil would be in the details.  Coming out smelling like roses in one regime change is tricky; two would be nigh impossible.