Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Zanza]

So the German chancellor apparently said that we should not boot Russia out of the SWIFT payments system to be able to react to further Russian escalation. What further escalation? I don't get it. Hit them hard now. 

[Grey Fox]

Well, Russia is about to fire bomb Kiyv so there's always that escalation to deal tomorrow morning.


Good god, the west is so weak.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Yeah, I have a hard time seeing this as anything but the beginning of war between the West and Russia, and we should plan accordingly.

Anyone who is not thinking this way today is a fool beyond all belief. I hope that we are wrong but to bet everything on that hope is madness.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally Ukraine's Defence Minister has said 'we need as much Stinger and anti-tank weapons as possible'. I hope we can send them.

[OttoVonBismarck]

It's interesting because there have been times in my re-readings of America's Cold War history that I've actually thought, at times, that America's behavior vis-a-vis the Soviets (who were rightfully seen as an enemy and frequently was ruled by evil men) was often so belligerently hostile that it was hard to not somewhat say America was provoking Cold War flare ups more than the Soviets did.

I think what perhaps maybe needs to be understood now is America's elected Presidents of the mid-century understood that men like Stalin only understand aggression, and only understand strength and the risk of defeat. Nothing else curtails them.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Incidentally Ukraine's Defence Minister has said 'we need as much Stinger and anti-tank weapons as possible'. I hope we can send them.

Problem is they needed them now, with Russia all over the country how do we even do the logistics of getting things to Ukraine without putting people directly in the warzone.

[Sheilbh]

A lot of this ties into how America's political weakness at home is translating to real strategic weakness. Biden is most likely afraid to target the Russian energy industry because he knows the 2022 elections are coming up, and any serious blow to that industry will cause hugely unpopular gas price hikes at the pumps here. I can't really imagine FDR and JFK having such concerns, and in fact I seem to remember them giving speeches about how Americans have a responsibility to deal with the hard times to achieve important geopolitical goals. Different era I guess.

On the European side I suspect the equivalent are Europe's fiscal rules.

Several threads by Mujtaba Rahman formerly of the Commission saying there's lots of concern about the economic impact of sanctons. It's a big concern for Draghi as Italy is heavily dependent on Russian gas, inflation is very high and the Italy-Germany spread is its highest in a few years. The risk is sanctions = energy inflation = monetary tightening = issues for Italy's debt situation.

The fiscal doves have said one solution would be to loosen or suspend fiscal rules on debt (possibly with common debt, as with covid, or some mechanism to compensate the most adversely impacted countries). But the hawks won the argument against so instead the EU think they need some time to assess the economic impact of the current sanctions and possible Russian counter-measures before they can make a decision on fiscal rules and possible compensation. The fiscal hawks are also worried about setting another precedent after covid.

Newsnight asked the European Finance Commissioner Mairead McGuinness about the fiscal consequences and the call from some states to loosen or suspend the fiscal rules and she replied "we're not there yet".

If there's anything to that - then it is, to be put it kindly, absolutely insane

[The Larch]

One for the trivia section of future history books:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Snake_Island

The Battle of Snake Island (Zmiinyi Island in Ukranian) took place on 24 February 2022 in Snake Island during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

At around 18:00, Ukrainian State Border Guards announced that Snake Island had come under attack from Russian ships, during the first day of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

At 22:00 (01:00 Moscow Time, UTC+2), the State Border Guard Service announced that Russian forces had captured the island following a naval and air bombardment that destroyed all infrastructure on the island. Thirteen Ukrainian border guards, representing the entirety of the Ukrainian military presence on the island, were killed during the battle after refusing to surrender.

"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

The recording of the exchange, if confirmed, is in the following tweet: https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1496990787539595280

[mongers]

Not related to Shelf's post, but I think we shouldn't even be talking in terms of X action against Russia will cost us Y % loss of potential GDP growth in Z (say 5-10) years time.

The calculus should be how safe and stable should Europe as a whole be in 10 years time.

If that means European GDP is 10-20% less than it is today, but Putin is dead, I'd happily take that.

Do we really want to be thinking, great we're 10-20% better off than in 2022, but Putin is still at our, now reduced common European borders? 

[The Larch]

A lot of this ties into how America's political weakness at home is translating to real strategic weakness. Biden is most likely afraid to target the Russian energy industry because he knows the 2022 elections are coming up, and any serious blow to that industry will cause hugely unpopular gas price hikes at the pumps here. I can't really imagine FDR and JFK having such concerns, and in fact I seem to remember them giving speeches about how Americans have a responsibility to deal with the hard times to achieve important geopolitical goals. Different era I guess.

On the European side I suspect the equivalent are Europe's fiscal rules.

Several threads by Mujtaba Rahman formerly of the Commission saying there's lots of concern about the economic impact of sanctons. It's a big concern for Draghi as Italy is heavily dependent on Russian gas, inflation is very high and the Italy-Germany spread is its highest in a few years. The risk is sanctions = energy inflation = monetary tightening = issues for Italy's debt situation.

The fiscal doves have said one solution would be to loosen or suspend fiscal rules on debt (possibly with common debt, as with covid, or some mechanism to compensate the most adversely impacted countries). But the hawks won the argument against so instead the EU think they need some time to assess the economic impact of the current sanctions and possible Russian counter-measures before they can make a decision on fiscal rules and possible compensation. The fiscal hawks are also worried about setting another precedent after covid.

Newsnight asked the European Finance Commissioner Mairead McGuinness about the fiscal consequences and the call from some states to loosen or suspend the fiscal rules and she replied "we're not there yet".

If there's anything to that - then it is, to be put it kindly, absolutely insane

Apparently the reason for Italy to block the sanctions including removing Russia from SWIFT is that several Italian banks have huge exposures to Russian debt, which need SWIFT to get paid.

[Admiral Yi]

By all means, send all Stingers and Javelins available. 

Hope we're not shipping them LAWS.

The Economist has been saying we shouldn't de-SWIFT them because that will increase the chance of creating a parallel system.  I don't get that argument.

And I could certainly live with a total embargo.

[Sheilbh]

By all means, send all Stingers and Javelins available. 

Hope we're not shipping them LAWS.

I know nothing about military stuff but the UK was airlifting in NLAWS before the invasion. No idea what they are but I assume similar?

[Jacob]

By all means, send all Stingers and Javelins available. 

Hope we're not shipping them LAWS.

The Economist has been saying we shouldn't de-SWIFT them because that will increase the chance of creating a parallel system.  I don't get that argument.

And I could certainly live with a total embargo.

Yes agreed. I'm all in on starting Cold War 2.0 right around now. The potential costs are only going to rise if we push it back.

[The Larch]

The Economist has been saying we shouldn't de-SWIFT them because that will increase the chance of creating a parallel system.  I don't get that argument.

I read some comments today by some reporter who said that preventing Russia from using SWIFT wouldn't actually be that harmful for them for several reasons, one of them being (IIRC) preventing that parallel system that Russia would have to employ (already developed after Crimea but not fully implemented, or something) from cementing itself as a real, solid alternative for SWIFT.

[mongers]

By all means, send all Stingers and Javelins available. 

Hope we're not shipping them LAWS.

I know nothing about military stuff but the UK was airlifting in NLAWS before the invasion. No idea what they are but I assume similar?

Not sure, LAWS probably stand for Light Ant-tank Weapon, likely an unguided rocket with a small HEAT warhead, NLAWS by name suggest something similar.

Whereas Yi is asking about Javelins which are more recent guided AT/battlefield missiles with more effective hit rates and warheads?  Just my guess.

edit:
I looked it up, according to wiki the NLAWS is a more sophisicated fire and forget guided light AT missile, so a definite improvement on LAWS.