Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Sheilbh]

Because their current briefing is that they have recaptured it tonight

[Admiral Yi]

I got that the first time you wrote it.

[FunkMonk]

Dunno about wishing death on someone but, I mean, someone needs to go out with Vlad in a rowboat and come back to shore without him.

[OttoVonBismarck]

South Korean military and Japanese SDF are both way more formidable than any European military.

I've no doubt - but Russia's not China either. Sorry that wasn't meant as a slight to Asian allies - but that I think China's a big challenge/risk to respond to than Russia. As I say Russia is in relative decline, it's hydro-carbon based economy and its economy is the size of Benelux - if European countries, some of the richest and most advanced in the world, wanted to that is a challenge they can face without more and more US support. I don't think that situation holds in Asia-Pacific - I don't think South Korea and Japan (even if they could work together) could really face or manage China which is a rising power.

That's the choice I think is coming for the US - and I think they will (probably rightly) choose the Pacific.

One reason I want to see the U.S. beef up its presence in Europe is because I think we can actually do both. That being said if we had to choose which one to invest the most in--I would say Europe. A few reasons:

1. Europe is the heart of our culture and I can't just pretend we should bloodlessly look at what's best for the United States. The United States, its government, for whatever parts of it that have produced good in the world, freedom, higher quality of life etc (with all the faults), that is because of a thousand+ years inheritance of Western culture. The Enlightenment, the English Bill of Rights, the very concept of limited rulers and the rule of law. These things did not develop anywhere but the West. Our religious, literary, and linguistic inheritance is from Europe, it is not from Asia. It is easy to feel a wide gulf between the United States and Europe but the United States is a literal creation of Europe and European peoples, and that broad shared culture is important. It is worth defending, and it is worth fighting for even if it carries heavy costs.

2. Aside from Taiwan, all of our significant allies in Asia, are in pretty strong positions. South Korea and Japan both have large U.S. military deployments on them, that are permanent and not going anywhere--China cannot invade either without being at war with the United States. Additionally, both South Korea and Japan are somewhat geographically defended from a quick or easy Chinese invasion. Some of our "second order friends" or developing friends in the region: India, Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, are also mostly either removed enough from China to avoid easy invasion or, the one that borders China (India) has a deterrent that China won't casually mess with, one more serious than U.S. tripwire troops.

3. Our Asian allies seem frankly more obvious of the realism of China's risks than Europe / NATO has been about Russia (at least before this week.) As evidence of this, all of these countries have been making serious military moves to protect themselves. They additionally are forming joint economic alliances specifically designed to work around and limit China's strength.

3. The most vulnerable part of our Asian friends is Taiwan, and well...Taiwan is a weird situation. Unlike the territories Russia has its eyes on, almost no country on earth actually views Taiwan as an actual country. We made a decision in the 1970s to abandon the fiction that Taiwan was China, in order to open up the PRC to Western relations. We paid the price of abandoning Taiwan to some degree in international relations, in not giving them a bilateral security guarantee, and then adopting a strategy of "intentional vagueness" about how we'd respond to an invasion of Taiwan. The simple reality is we made a choice, and that choice at least partially tacitly accepted abandonment of Taiwan, we basically said an island of renegade Chinese wasn't "worth it" and have on many levels conceded that Taiwan is at least on some level rightfully China's, even if we strongly disagree that China should be able to impose its will on Taiwan by force. While I feel a lot of sympathy for the miserably shitty situation Taiwan is in, the reality is we haven't built a post world order around supporting minimally recognized break away provinces, we have built it around recognize free and sovereign states that don't settle territorial issues with wars of conquest. And that's what Putin is attacking.

[Jacob]

So, assuming:

1. Russia eventually takes Ukraine
2. Russia carries out some number of atrocities, either to do so or as part of keeping control after they take Ukraine
3. Ukrainians in spite of being defeated in open battle continue to be resent the situation

How capable are Ukrainians and / or Ukrainian sympathetic Russians of taking terrorism to Russia proper?

My thinking is that given the whole "brother people" thing and given the number of Russians (and Ukrainians) with roots in both countries, it may be difficult for the Russian state to prevent infiltration, sabotage, terrorism and other asymmetrical actions by actors sympathetic to Ukraine.

Russian society - as I understand it - is well geared to discriminate against people from the Caucasus as part of the tool set for protecting itself against asymmetrical warfare from that region. I think it may be harder to distinguish Ukrainian loyalists from regular Russians (or Ukrainians who are susceptible to accept and be absorbed into the Russian polity) as effectively in the coming years.

Just a thought.

But if I were a Ukrainian war planner facing a high likelihood of defeat on the field of battle I would absolutely consider an Iraq style insurgency as my next step, and I would also consider taking asymmetrical actions into Russia proper.

[DGuller]

I have a hard time imagining Chechen-style terrorism from Ukrainians, but maybe that's naivete.  I can definitely see acts of terror in Ukraine against collaborators, but bombs in Moscow subway cars doesn't seem like something that would ever be popular among fellow Ukrainians.

[Jacob]

I have a hard time imagining Chechen-style terrorism from Ukrainians, but maybe that's naivete.  I can definitely see acts of terror in Ukraine against collaborators, but bombs in Moscow subway cars doesn't seem like something that would ever be popular among fellow Ukrainians.

I wasn't thinking primarily about targeting civilians, but infrastructure and more legitimate targets. And my question was mostly about the potential Ukrainian capabilities in that area.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I've always been at least partially skeptical Ukrainians, in broad number, will really keep fighting once the government is beaten. I suspect their trouble making will be more akin to Maidan stuff, when the Russian puppet is installed they'll do big demonstrations etc, which will be put down harshly, and then repeated periodically in some sort of effort to undermine the regime. Maybe I am wrong, but it's not that common that I've seen for conquered Europeans to put up a big fight, look at Poland, Hungary, the Baltics, Germany after WWII etc etc. Europeans being ruled by other white Europeans I think you get a lot of tacit passivity. It's just a different formula from Muslims who live in mud huts being conquered by infidels, those people don't value their lives or the lives of their family--Afghans for example barely care about their families at all (they regularly sell their children.) There's a level of barbarism you need to engage in Muslim / tribal people style insurgent violence that even the Eastern Europeans are simply too civilized to do on a wide scale I think.

The Chechens did it for the obvious reason.

[DGuller]

I have a hard time imagining Chechen-style terrorism from Ukrainians, but maybe that's naivete.  I can definitely see acts of terror in Ukraine against collaborators, but bombs in Moscow subway cars doesn't seem like something that would ever be popular among fellow Ukrainians.

I wasn't thinking primarily about targeting civilians, but infrastructure and more legitimate targets. And my question was mostly about the potential Ukrainian capabilities in that area.

I agree that infiltrating Russia would be very easy for Ukrainians.  Not only do Ukrainians look like Russians, but I imagine Russia would be hesitant to wall off Ukraine.  The whole strategy of Russia is to not treat Ukraine as a separate country.

[DGuller]

I've always been at least partially skeptical Ukrainians, in broad number, will really keep fighting once the government is beaten. I suspect their trouble making will be more akin to Maidan stuff, when the Russian puppet is installed they'll do big demonstrations etc, which will be put down harshly, and then repeated periodically in some sort of effort to undermine the regime. Maybe I am wrong, but it's not that common that I've seen for conquered Europeans to put up a big fight, look at Poland, Hungary, the Baltics, Germany after WWII etc etc. Europeans being ruled by other white Europeans I think you get a lot of tacit passivity. It's just a different formula from Muslims who live in mud huts being conquered by infidels, those people don't value their lives or the lives of their family--Afghans for example barely care about their families at all (they regularly sell their children.) There's a level of barbarism you need to engage in Muslim / tribal people style insurgent violence that even the Eastern Europeans are simply too civilized to do on a wide scale I think.

The Chechens did it for the obvious reason.

Western Ukrainians resisted the Soviets for a decade after the end of WWII, despite the obvious consequences for them.

[Jacob]

Seeing reports that Russian forces aren't highly motivated. Not sure how true it is or how significant even if it is... but still.

[Valmy]

Seeing reports that Russian forces aren't highly motivated. Not sure how true it is or how significant even if it is... but still.

Yeah morale is supposed to be low.

You guys seem to have a pretty firm grasp that Russia should win easily but this is the first major ground war of this kind in decades. I don't really know enough about modern war to be able to predict. Supposedly the Ukrainian government is passing out machine guns like candy in Kiev. I don't know what is going to happen. It could be a cake walk or a nightmare and I don't know if Russia or Ukraine know either.

[Jacob]

Seeing reports that Russian forces aren't highly motivated. Not sure how true it is or how significant even if it is... but still.

Yeah morale is supposed to be low.

You guys seem to have a pretty firm grasp that Russia should win easily but this is the first major ground war of this kind in decades. I don't really know enough about modern war to be able to predict. Supposedly the Ukrainian government is passing out machine guns like candy in Kiev. I don't know what is going to happen. It could be a cake walk or a nightmare and I don't know if Russia or Ukraine know either.

I am not certain at all, I just don't want to fool myself with wishful thinking. A whole lot rides on the next few days and weeks.1

[Syt]

I have a hard time imagining Chechen-style terrorism from Ukrainians, but maybe that's naivete.  I can definitely see acts of terror in Ukraine against collaborators, but bombs in Moscow subway cars doesn't seem like something that would ever be popular among fellow Ukrainians.

I wasn't thinking primarily about targeting civilians, but infrastructure and more legitimate targets. And my question was mostly about the potential Ukrainian capabilities in that area.

You mean an ETA or IRA style campaign targeting military and police?

[Jacob]

You mean an ETA or IRA style campaign targeting military and police?

I didn't get that far, to be honest. I was just thinking about Russian vulnerabilities in the area.

But yeah... I don't know... blowing up bridges or railway tracks, for example. Or yeah, police stations or secondary military targets (logistics depots, recruiting/ conscription stations). Or electrical infrastructure. Or, hell, a gas pipeline - those things are long and can't be guarded everywhere. Would be nice to cause some havoc at one of the many troll or hacker farms Russia runs. Or maybe RT offices. Or the office space of Putin's political party, whatever it's called. Or the tax office.

I dunno, I think there are likely going to be a reasonable number of soft targets that would create inconvenience - or symbolize Putin or the Russian state - that could be targeted.