Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[DGuller]

Does it have to fool anyone to have an effect?  I can imagine that just having to slow down and ask whether you're seeing a real thing or a dummy is going to wear on your effectiveness.

[Admiral Yi]

Just saw in a Sky clip about US shell production that Ukraine is burning through 7,000 rounds a day.

[Valmy]

Just saw in a Sky clip about US shell production that Ukraine is burning through 7,000 rounds a day.

The Germans fired 1 million rounds at the French on the 21st of February 1916. 7,000 rounds a day doesn't seem like much.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

It's happening.

War in our time. Again.

A little surreal that we will be commenting the Russian invasion of Ukraine. What would 1989 you think of that?

Back on page 115 of this 534 page thread we had the invasion start, one year ago today, well in a couple more hours for the exact anniversary. 

Thoughts on the next year's likely events?

I can see Putin eventually dialling back on the victory at all cost approach and instead hedgehogging through to the end of 2024, in the hope that Trump wins and in a fenzy of Trumpian ego inflation, they strike a 'grand bargain' involving Trump selling Ukraine down the river in his quest for higher domestic ratings.

On the other hand: winning the war decisively with Russia beaten back into its recognized borders would mightily inflate the orange man's ego. Might even hold a parade in Kiev for him, shake some hands here and there, sweeten the deal with some golf courses in the Donbass (the bunkers are already there), and a resurgent economy because 'war is good for business' (at least that's what the Ferengi say)

anyways: more bloodletting, ideally most of it to the Russians' disadvantage. Western tanks taking the field and hopefully performing excellently. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for one or two big Ukrainian counter-offensives with lots of liberation videos (though it seems unlikely now, but looks can be deceiving. See Kharkiv).
I'm also expecting a lot of dithering from western politicians, endless streams of tankies annoying the shit out of me, lots of Russian bots on youtube... And maybe, just maybe, western airplanes taking to the skies before the year is out.

All in all another depressing year for the people of Ukraine in other words

[celedhring]

So, the Chinese "peace plan" seems just a vague collection of their usual platitudes.

China calls for Ukraine peace talks as it steps up engagement in the conflict
A 12-point position paper released on the anniversary of Russia's invasion has been greeted cautiously by Ukraine

Russia-Ukraine war: latest updates
Helen Davidson in Taipei
@heldavidson
Fri 24 Feb 2023 05.38 GMT
China's government has called for peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, while urging all parties to avoid nuclear escalation and end attacks on civilians, in a statement which appeared to maintain Beijing's stance that the west is fuelling the conflict and was dismissed as anodyne by analysts.

The 12-point position paper on Ukraine was released on Friday morning, on the one year anniversary of Russia's invasion, and ahead of an expected speech by Xi Jinping.

The paper, for which Ukraine was not consulted, was cautiously welcomed by Kyiv, but criticised by US officials and some analysts who noted the growing ties between China and Russia. On Thursday China's top diplomat visited Moscow and pledged a deeper partnership.

The paper stated that the international community should "create conditions and platforms" for negotiations to resume, and claimed that China would continue to "play a constructive role in this regard". 

It did not offer specific steps but included strong language opposing the "threat or use" of nuclear weapons.

"Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided. China opposes the research, development and use of chemical and biological weapons by any country under any circumstances."

The paper did not address its suggestions to a particular side in the conflict, instead calling for all parties to "stay rational and exercise restraint", and to "strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict".

Some of the language appeared to be directed at the west. The paper warned against "expanding military blocs", an apparent reference to Nato, and urged all parties to "avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions", mirroring language that Beijing officials have repeatedly used to criticise the US's support of Ukraine.

Ukraine's charge d'affaires to China, Zhanna Leshchynska, called the position paper "a good sign" and said she expects China to be more active in its support of her country.

"We hope they also urge Russia to stop the war and withdraw its troops," she said, adding that she did not at the moment see China as supporting Ukrainian efforts.

China's government has presented itself as a neutral party, one capable of easing tensions between Russia and Ukraine. However it has refused to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine, instead blaming the west for inflaming tensions, and some senior officials have repeatedly voiced explicit support for Russia's aims.

This week the US government said it has intelligence suggesting Beijing is considering supplying weapons to Russia, and on Friday a report by Der Spiegel claimed Moscow was in negotiations with a Chinese company about supplying large quantities of strike drones. On Friday Beijing also abstained – for the fourth time – from a UN vote demanding Russia withdraw from Ukraine.

Chinese officials have rejected the US claims as baseless smears and are yet to comment on the Der Spiegel report.

Friday's paper also emphasised positions Beijing has promoted in the past, including a demand for respect of national sovereignty and "territorial integrity", and for the end of economic sanctions.

Speaking to CNN, the US national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, dismissed much of the paper's contents.

"My first reaction to it is that it could stop at point one, which is to respect the sovereignty of all nations," he said.

"Ukraine wasn't attacking Russia. Nato wasn't attacking Russia. The United States wasn't attacking Russia ... Russia's aims in the war were to wipe Ukraine off the map, to absorb it into Russia."

Bonnie Glaser, a China expert at the US-based German Marshall Fund, said the paper was largely a summary of its previously stated positions and statements, which were "replete with contradictions".

"Beijing claims to support Ukraine's sovereignty, but it has not criticised Russia's annexations of Ukrainian territory," Glaser said.

Glaser also noted the last of the 12 points, which states China stood ready to help in post-conflict reconstruction, "sounds like China is keen to get its [state-owned enterprises] into Ukraine, both to make a profit and promote Chinese influence via commercial and economic means".

Drew Thompson, a scholar with the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and former US defence department official, said the statement lacked credibility.

"Without... specifying a the need to return territory that Russia is attempting to annex, Beijing's statement is not a plan, but a statement of anodyne principals that China itself does not follow, such as opposition to economic coercion in cases of political differences," he said.

[The Brain]

anodyne principals

The bane of the US school system.

[Josquius]

It wouldn't matter if it shat on the west if it actually brought Russia to serious negotiations. Let the Russians believe their both sides the same and theyre lucky to defend their territory from America story.

But... All quiet from Russia and seems unlikely they'll be moving any time soon.

[Tamas]

With China the question still remains whether this is the preparation for something or they just wanted to look important and now going to remain passive.

[Sheilbh]

I think the bit that might be interesting is the nuclear comments. We've read there's been a couple of times so far in the war when China felt the need (or were pushed by/did a deal with the US) to very strongly communicate to Putin that he neds to tone down the nuclear threats.

So interesting that nuclear is again one of their key points particularly given that that can only be aimed at their friend "without limits".

[Tamas]

I think the bit that might be interesting is the nuclear comments. We've read there's been a couple of times so far in the war when China felt the need (or were pushed by/did a deal with the US) to very strongly communicate to Putin that he neds to tone down the nuclear threats.

So interesting that nuclear is again one of their key points particularly given that that can only be aimed at their friend "without limits".

I just hope they remain sensible. China could easily emerge as the biggest winner from all this if they just bide their time and take notes. But if they commit even just economically on the side of Russia, that'll be one more big step toward WW3.

[Josquius]

An interesting point I've heard Re: Moldova.
It could be very worthwhile for Ukraine to help sort out Transnistria. A quick victory out of which they'd capture vast amounts of warsaw pact ammunition.
Certainly something to think about, though given Moldova's problems I doubt they're keen to restart that issue.

[Tamas]

An interesting point I've heard Re: Moldova.
It could be very worthwhile for Ukraine to help sort out Transnistria. A quick victory out of which they'd capture vast amounts of warsaw pact ammunition.
Certainly something to think about, though given Moldova's problems I doubt they're keen to restart that issue.

It'd complicate matters though and arguably would transform Ukraine's war from strictly self-defense to anti-Russian influence one. If they do it, I hope they manage to make proper pretext for it.

[celedhring]

With China the question still remains whether this is the preparation for something or they just wanted to look important and now going to remain passive.

Honestly this feels just performative. The "plan" is just a bunch of vague declarations that are just a restatement of China's official position throughout the war, with no concrete proposals.

[Maladict]

First Leopards have arrived in Ukraine

[Tamas]

With China the question still remains whether this is the preparation for something or they just wanted to look important and now going to remain passive.

Honestly this feels just performative. The "plan" is just a bunch of vague declarations that are just a restatement of China's official position throughout the war, with no concrete proposals.

That doesn't mean it cannot be used as a pretext for more involvement.