Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Tamas]

I'm fairly sure that I won't be able to visit my home city of St. Petersburg for the rest of my life.

[Tamas]

Re. troop quality, it always annoyed me in NATO vs. Warsaw Pact games, especially ones set in the 80s how efficient the WP forces seemed, well, the vassal states' at least. I have no idea what quality the Soviet forces were but I heard enough stories from Hungarian conscripts and reservists of the time to know that training was abysmal, morale could not be lower, AND the Soviets were mostly despised as an occupying force. I am 100% certain that in a Cold War gone hot scenario the Hungarian forces of the 80s would had melted away on contact with the enemy, and I have trouble believing it was anything different in any of the other vassal states. 

[Josquius]

Re. troop quality, it always annoyed me in NATO vs. Warsaw Pact games, especially ones set in the 80s how efficient the WP forces seemed, well, the vassal states' at least. I have no idea what quality the Soviet forces were but I heard enough stories from Hungarian conscripts and reservists of the time to know that training was abysmal, morale could not be lower, AND the Soviets were mostly despised as an occupying force. I am 100% certain that in a Cold War gone hot scenario the Hungarian forces of the 80s would had melted away on contact with the enemy, and I have trouble believing it was anything different in any of the other vassal states. 

I think you'll hear broadly the same of any nation with conscription.
Switzerland for instance has a insanely high reputation in war gamers minds.... But the army there is an absolute shambles where a bunch of guys are forced to march about in the woods for 3 pounds a week and they spend most of their time drinking.

[Syt]

And there was the constant concern among NATO and WP allies whether Germans would shoot at Germans.

[Sheilbh]

Makes me wonder how article 5 would work on that regard. I don't know about Gibraltar, but I know that - for example - Ceuta and Melilla are exluded from article 5 protection (which kinda makes me wonder what we're getting from our NATO membership, given that's Spain's #1 security concern, but it's not like we're contributing much either...)

I'd imagine Gibraltar is very much covered by NATO because I'd expect control of the straits was a big thing in 1949 - but I don't know.

The other question is the quality of this remaining strength - is it more or less the same as what we've seen?  Is it better (the theory that Putin's been holding back "the real army" has been suggested by some folks, though I'm not sure I buy it), or is it worse because Putin led with his best troops?

The latest of the British MoD's "Defence Intelligence" updates on Ukraine sort of mentioned this:

Russia is increasingly seeking to generate additional troops to bolster and replace its personnel losses in Ukraine. As a result of these losses it is likely Russia is struggling to conduct offensive operations in the face of sustained Ukrainian resistance. Continued personnel losses will also make it difficult for Russia to secure occupied territory.

Russia is redeploying forces from as far afield as its Eastern Military District, Pacific Fleet and Armenia. It is also increasingly seeking to exploit irregular sources such as Private Military Companies, Syrian and other mercenaries.

Russia will likely attempt to use these forces to hold captured territory and free up its combat power to renew stalled offensive operations.

So it sounds like they're bringing in the grunts and other resources to hold the territory they've won and free up the army to go back on the offensive. But that also implies they're not holding back better troop.

[Tamas]

This guy has an excellent (and funny) military tech Youtube channel, and did a great summary of the war a week ago. His latest look at it is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Igq2fqa7RY4

What he is trying to do is what I have been missing: trying to cut through Russian sources to get a view on the progress and damage they are doing, as that's understandably much harder to do than learning of Ukrainian successes.

One particular thing I like a few minutes in the video is him pointing out all those Soviet flags flying around on Russian vehicles, and how this should really make people stop pretending this is about defending against evil NATO.

[celedhring]

I don't know how reliable this twitter account is but:

Visegrád 24
@visegrad24
BREAKING:

The Kremlin has stated that an Austrian/Swedish neutrality model for Ukrainian, preserving their own Army but without foreign military bases, could be seen as a compromise - Interfax.

That must mean that Russia is fine with EU membership, right?

That would be a significant walking back on "demilitarization", if true.

Also, absolutely no way that Putin is fine with Ukraine eventually joining the EU.

[Tamas]

If Ukraine is left outside of Russian control, direct or indirect, without major territorial concessions, that will achieve exactly zero of Putin's objectives. Also, any neutrality pledge will be extremely easy to be utilised by Russia as a future cause for war, using the same kind of dreamed-up BS excuses they have been using even without a conveniently  abusable Ukrainian pledge being documented.

In other words, a more or less white peace with a pledge of neutrality would be more like a truce, probably no longer than a couple of years.

[Josephus]

Not sure if this has been posted; I'm not reading everything here. But there has been talk about how surprisingly week the Russian army is. I came across this Twitter story the other day, that explains one of the reasons why.

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1502673952572854278

[celedhring]

If Ukraine is left outside of Russian control, direct or indirect, without major territorial concessions, that will achieve exactly zero of Putin's objectives. Also, any neutrality pledge will be extremely easy to be utilised by Russia as a future cause for war, using the same kind of dreamed-up BS excuses they have been using even without a conveniently  abusable Ukrainian pledge being documented.

In other words, a more or less white peace with a pledge of neutrality would be more like a truce, probably no longer than a couple of years.

On that regard, from one of the Ukranian negotiators:

🇺🇦 model of security guarantees is on the negotiating table. What does this mean? A rigid agreement with a number of guarantor states undertaking clear legal obligations to actively prevent attacks on 🇺🇦.
Details:

The details are in Ukranian, I google-translated them.

Undoubtedly, we understand the attempt of our partners to remain an initiative party in the negotiation process. Hence the words about the Swedish or Austrian model of neutrality. But Ukraine is now in a state of direct war with Russia. Therefore, the model can only be Ukrainian and only about legally verified security guarantees. And no other models or options.
What does it mean? First, absolute security guarantees. Effective, not protocol or "Budapest". This means that the signatories of the guarantees do not stand aside in the event of an attack on Ukraine, as today. But they take an active part on the side of Ukraine in the conflict and officially provide us with an immediate supply of the necessary amount of weapons. And, secondly, Ukraine no longer wants to depend on bureaucratic procedures that allow or do not allow to close the sky from the same cruise missiles. We need direct and firm guarantees that the sky will be closed.
I will add that Ukraine has never been a militaristic state that attacks or plans to attack its neighbors. Unlike these neighbors. That is why today Ukraine wants to have a really strong pool of allies with clearly defined security guarantees.

No way Russia accepts this, unless they're really more fucked than we're aware of.

[Sheilbh]

Also, absolutely no way that Putin is fine with Ukraine eventually joining the EU.

I cannot see that - separately I know the EU never kicks a country out of accession process, so we still get updates on Turkey's membership prospects (not great), but I think it'd be worth taking a look at Serbia. Because as Europe is becoming more serious on security I don't think it has space for a country with that radically different a security perspective/policy - and it might be worth making that clear.

No way Russia accepts this, unless they're really more fucked than we're aware of.

Yeah - that basically sounds like NATO There's no way I can see Russia accepting that now but given that they've already moved to Sweden/Austria as a model it feels like they're walking back the maximalist war goals pretty rapidly.

Edit: Oh separately Russia has left the Council of Europe - I think they did this the day before a special meeting on expelling Russia

This also means they're no longer a signatory of the ECHR and could, say, re-introduce the death penalty. Not sure if they actually will but a sign of the darker paths that it feels Russia may go down to "win" this war.

[The Brain]

If the Kremlin is in fact fine with Ukraine collaborating a lot with NATO militaries, hosting NATO troops for exercises etc, then Putin's ass must really be raw from the pounding of the past weeks.

[Sheilbh]

Just on the troops point from one of the open source intelligence guys it looks like Russian and South Ossetian forces are being pulled out of South Ossetia and deployed to Ukraine. That feels like things must be pretty desperate.

Also saw this - from the guy who was getting his lines wrong at that security council meeting:

Oliver Carroll
@olliecarroll
Russian spy chief Naryshkin: "Russia's fate is being decided now; its future place in the world is being determined"

He might mean it in a different way than I would, but I think he's probably right.

[Tamas]

Possibly (I think that video I linked alluded to this), all those extra troops are needed to occupy and pacify the territory so far conquered. Which still sucks terribly for Russia, but doesn't necessarily mean that they have lost as many people as they are pulling into Ukraine from elsewhere.

[Threviel]

I don't know how reliable this twitter account is but:

Visegrád 24
@visegrad24
BREAKING:

The Kremlin has stated that an Austrian/Swedish neutrality model for Ukrainian, preserving their own Army but without foreign military bases, could be seen as a compromise - Interfax.

That must mean that Russia is fine with EU membership, right?

That would be a significant walking back on "demilitarization", if true.

Also, absolutely no way that Putin is fine with Ukraine eventually joining the EU.

Sweden is not a neutral country in the style of Austria. We are non-allied and there's a difference. If Ukraine gets neutrality on Swedish terms they can join NATO anytime, just like Sweden.

Austria's neutrality is a part of their constitution and if Ukraine gets neutrality their style then Putin gets what he wants.