Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[OttoVonBismarck]

My guess is Lukashenko abjectly fears losing control of his supposedly horribly low morale military. Lukashenka probably would have lost power this last year if not for Putin's help, I think he has to walk a fine line between making Putin too angry and losing control of his own spot, because he is not in nearly as stable a dictatorship as Putin is. I also think the risks of directly angering Putin for Lukashenko are probably lower right now than at most times--Putin is very busy, he doesn't have time to go after Belarus for disloyalty.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Because Ukraine is allowing independent journalists to cover the war we can kind of trust what we're hearing more generally out of Ukraine.

There's also the fact that their motivation to lie would be to make it seem worse than it is, not better.

We're watching a country with 1/4 the population of the aggressor humiliate them militarily.

Just reminding--you still can't count the Russians out. Logistics are a bitch, big wars of conquest are a bitch, especially against a country that is tenaciously fighting like Ukraine. But to quote Shawshank, war ain't no fairy tale. Having a fuckton more men, material, and resources does actually mean a whole hell of a lot in a war. I don't think anyone considers current Russian progress good, especially not Putin or Russia's military leadership. But there is nothing intrinsically that has happened so far, that to me, says Russia can't keep loading more men and material and keep pushing. Nor is there much that tells me Ukraine can really hold them at bay forever if Russia does so.

The big question always comes back to--how long will Ukraine fight this hard and how high will Putin watch the butcher's bill go and the equipment bill go before deciding it is permanently damaging to his regime to keep going.

I did read one take that Ukraine is actually going to get more difficult to fight over the next couple months, apparently they actually have a decent number of military veterans from Western countries who have crossed over to volunteer, and they are expected to make a significant contribution once Ukraine can integrate them into their military structure (which will take time), and some of the West's best weapons that have been sent over will still take some time to get online and get trained on--but once that window of a couple months has passed, if Russia hasn't taken most of the country, its job actually may get even harder.

This analysis forgets one rather critical piece - morale.

I don't see how Russian morale gets better, and while I can imagine Ukrainian morale getting worse, I could also imagine (and actually expect) that it is going up, not down.

The US had basically infinite resources  in men and material in Vietnam, and that was worth....well, it was worth a lot. But not enough.

I think Russia is fucked, and I don't think it is a problem that is solvable by shoving more conscripts into battle, without regard to how they feel about that. Even if Putin is willing to pay that butchers bill, I don't think the cattle are going to go along with it. In fact...I don't think they are going along with it right now.

I don't disagree with any of it, but I am also saying there is a lot us pundits do not know about Ukrainian morale and logistics, so I can't entirely dismiss the chance they may suffer some broad collapse, simply because this war has to be grinding them down and I don't know any unvarnished specifics as to their situation. The longer Ukraine is able to hold the current rough lines, the more it tells me about how well they're setup to keep going.

Edit to Add: We are not even at three weeks yet, remember the U.S. military had not taken Baghdad yet at this point in the 2003 invasion. I even remember some CNN pundits saying our invasion was not going as quickly as hoped.

[celedhring]

On morale, I saw this earlier about Belarus:

Dmitri Alperovitch
@DAlperovitch
Lukashenko says Belarus forces will not join the war:
"I want to emphasize once again that we are not going to get involved in this operation that Russia is conducting in Ukraine. The most important thing, as I tell those of you in the military, is that there is no need for that"

My first thought was on how weirdly see-sawing the power relationship has been between Putin and Lukashenko and that Belarus still hasn't got its forces directly involved. But someone pointed out that the bit addressed directly at the military may have been motivated by a need to quell unrest/mutinous talk - which is an interesting thought

Yeah, that quote reads like "see? No need to coup me"

[Admiral Yi]

Just reminding--you still can't count the Russians out. Logistics are a bitch, big wars of conquest are a bitch, especially against a country that is tenaciously fighting like Ukraine. But to quote Shawshank, war ain't no fairy tale. Having a fuckton more men, material, and resources does actually mean a whole hell of a lot in a war. I don't think anyone considers current Russian progress good, especially not Putin or Russia's military leadership. But there is nothing intrinsically that has happened so far, that to me, says Russia can't keep loading more men and material and keep pushing. Nor is there much that tells me Ukraine can really hold them at bay forever if Russia does so.

I don't doubt that Russia has a great deal more manpower in reserve, but do you think they have an endless to reserve of equipment?

[Jacob]

I saw a description of Putin as "basically the one stop shop for struggling dictators and autocrats." Seems about right.

[crazy canuck]

So I'm not sure others would see it as a breach of the "rule of law" or really having anything to say about reputation - because they're not UN/global sanctions that all states are (in theory) obliged to respect. Seizing the property affected by such sanctions seems like a reasonable counter measure.

We were talking about Cummins cancelling Russia's license to produce their diesel engines and Russia continuing to do so.  That's only tangentially related to sanctions.

The contract presumably had a force majeure clause l;ike every other contract, and the Russian government ordering the continued production of the engines, license or not, wuld be an example of force majeure.  One cannot expect a government to forgo war manufacturing because of mere licensing details.

The US started manufacturing Bofors 40mm AA guns without a license from Bofors.  Later, they agreed to  pay something like $100,000 and turn over all their plans after the war (at which point the US also agreed to stop manufacturing the guns.  There was zero blowback from this.

The US never acquired a license for the Oerlikon 20mm AA gun, because Oerliken refused to license US production.  Again, zero blowback and, again, the US stopped production after the ware ended.

In wartime, licensing means a lot less than it does in peacetime.  It's more than a bit ironic that the Russian government would undoubtedly simultaneously argue that wartime production of the Cummins engine without a license is legal and that they are not at war.

Great points

The company may have to rely on such a clause in the event sanctions against Russia do not include what they are doing.

[crazy canuck]

It is really interesting to see how much Putin's Russia sucks massive ass balls.

I mean, I knew they sucked, but this much? That's pretty good. Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good.

One thing is for sure.  The Ukrainians have massive balls.

[PJL]

It is really interesting to see how much Putin's Russia sucks massive ass balls.

I mean, I knew they sucked, but this much? That's pretty good. Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good.

One thing is for sure.  The Ukrainians have massive balls.

Yep, that's been the biggest surprise of this conflict so far, the Ukrainians have given the Afghans a mastercalass in how to fight for your country.

[Valmy]

It is really interesting to see how much Putin's Russia sucks massive ass balls.

I mean, I knew they sucked, but this much? That's pretty good. Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good.

One thing is for sure.  The Ukrainians have massive balls.

Yep, that's been the biggest surprise of this conflict so far, the Ukrainians have given the Afghans a mastercalass in how to fight for your country.

This is their Great Patriotic War III (after 1812 and 1941, the Ukrainians were allied to the Swedes in The Great Northern War I think...or at least lots of them were) I guess.

[Valmy]

Oh shit, Russia also put Trudeau and Freeland on the "unwelcome to Russia" list - and also the leaders of each of the opposition parties as well. Whatever shall we do 

Kind of a small issue in the scheme of things but it is dawning on me that I probably missed my chance to ever visit Russia by not going there in the 1990s or 2000s. Ah well.

[Josquius]

Oh shit, Russia also put Trudeau and Freeland on the "unwelcome to Russia" list - and also the leaders of each of the opposition parties as well. Whatever shall we do 

Kind of a small issue in the scheme of things but it is dawning on me that I probably missed my chance to ever visit Russia by not going there in the 1990s or 2000s. Ah well.

Yeah it's sad. A bunch of my friends at my uni went. But of course despite having the time I was dirt poor and struggling just to eat at the time.
Really shoukd have tried to go 6 or 7 years ago when I had time and money... But seems now I'll have to wait until the 2040s if at all.

[Jacob]

I'm hoping to get an opportunity to visit Ukraine some time, though.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Just reminding--you still can't count the Russians out. Logistics are a bitch, big wars of conquest are a bitch, especially against a country that is tenaciously fighting like Ukraine. But to quote Shawshank, war ain't no fairy tale. Having a fuckton more men, material, and resources does actually mean a whole hell of a lot in a war. I don't think anyone considers current Russian progress good, especially not Putin or Russia's military leadership. But there is nothing intrinsically that has happened so far, that to me, says Russia can't keep loading more men and material and keep pushing. Nor is there much that tells me Ukraine can really hold them at bay forever if Russia does so.

I don't doubt that Russia has a great deal more manpower in reserve, but do you think they have an endless to reserve of equipment?

The DoD estimates I saw suggested to this weekend, Russia had lost 4% of its total combat vehicles and Ukraine 6%. Russia has a LOT of vehicles that are not deployed to the Ukraine theater.

[Sheilbh]

I'm hoping to get an opportunity to visit Ukraine some time, though.

I loved it. It's definitely worth a trip (especially if you like long train trips (and the map of which Ukrainian train stations are operating right now is amazing and is what I've used to try and work out how far the Russians are really getting).

Although if you have time for two former Soviet Union countries to go to - I strongly recommend Georgia. It's incredibly beautiful with good outdoors stuff, lots of fun cities/towns and amazing food

[DGuller]

On Soviet vs Russian military budgets, I wonder how much graft, theft and other inefficiencies were part of the Soviet costs. My impression is that a good amount of Russian military spending is diverted into the pockets of various kleptocrats - I wonder how that percentage compares to Soviet times.

It's hard to imagine how there could be more graft in USSR than modern Russia.  For one, the party functionaries in USSR had much less use for money.  It's not like you could skim the money off the top and buy up crap abroad.  In fact, you couldn't even buy up crap inside the USSR just with money.  Exchanging perks, favors, and access to goods and services is how corruption worked in USSR.