Russia invades Ukraine

[ainsworth74]

Is it really that bad? I guess it depends on the metrics given for 'quality of life'.

The large cities like Moscow and St Petersburg will offer (or at least did) a fairly western level of quality of life. But outside of that it can be pretty grim.

 

[Scotrail314209]

How likely is it for there to be some sort of escalation in the near future? I feel like things have been too quiet recently, which makes me fear something big is probably coming soon.

I will admit, I haven't been properly keeping track of things.

 

[Iskra]

The large cities like Moscow and St Petersburg will offer (or at least did) a fairly western level of quality of life. But outside of that it can be pretty grim.

It's a place that's great if you've got money, no different to the US in that respect.

However, while you are right that it can still be grim; a lot of older Russian's remember the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was an economic catastrophe for most people forcing them to sell their most basic possessions (or themselves) on the streets to survive- so today's grim will still be a lot better than that time, which possibly explains the lack of civil discontent amongst the population and more specifically why Putin's support holds amongst the Babushka's.

Anybody in any doubt about the devastating consequences at the end of the Soviet Union, should watch this remarkable series on Iplayer: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/p0d3hwl1/russia-19851999-traumazone

 

[357]

How likely is it for there to be some sort of escalation in the near future? I feel like things have been too quiet recently, which makes me fear something big is probably coming soon.

I will admit, I haven't been properly keeping track of things.

It's been the coldest part of the year, and it gets mega cold in Ukraine in February. Things will start warming up soon making progress a more realistic proposition for both sides

 

[Iskra]

It's been the coldest part of the year, and it gets mega cold in Ukraine in February. Things will start warming up soon making progress a more realistic proposition for both sides

That's not true. It's easier to travel over frozen terrain than it is thawing terrain, as that's when the problematic muds start that we saw large numbers of Russian tanks/vehicles bogged-down in last spring. Spring and Autumn are more troublesome than Summer/Winter in that part of of the world.

 

[Annetts key]

How likely is it for there to be some sort of escalation in the near future? I feel like things have been too quiet recently, which makes me fear something big is probably coming soon.

I will admit, I haven't been properly keeping track of things.

Russia has been trying and mostly failing to overwhelm the Ukrainian defences. They have literally been burning through thousands of men and lots of heavy military equipment.

It's been the coldest part of the year, and it gets mega cold in Ukraine in February. Things will start warming up soon making progress a more realistic proposition for both sides

Actually the weather will soon be warming up. Any frozen ground will defrost and become muddy again. With rain expected in the coming months, this is likely to reduce the likelihood of any large military offensives involving heavy military equipment such as tanks.

After the spring, as the ground drys up, then expect the Ukrainians to try a new large offensive.

Unless Russia is able to get more fighters (or cannon fodder) and get more equipment working, I’m not sure that they have enough resources to make any significant breakthrough now.

The Ukrainians appear to be much better at dealing with any Russian attempts.

 

[ainsworth74]

How likely is it for there to be some sort of escalation in the near future? I feel like things have been too quiet recently, which makes me fear something big is probably coming soon.

No-one can really know for sure.

We've been waiting for the Russians "Big Push" for a while now as everyone has expected them to use the forces they've been building up to do something around the anniversary of the start of the war. The more alarmist were suggesting they'd try another run at the original battleplan from February/March last year (lightening march on Kyiv and massive offensive in the east) but considering the force that went to war in February 2022 was almost certainly better equipped, trained and led than the force that's now in the field that, to me, always seemed highly unlikely. There has been some suggestion that the offensive has actually begun in the last couple of weeks with heavy fighting around places like Bahkmut, Vuhledar and Avdiivka and the Russians slowly, at extremely high cost, making limited progress in that sector. But that feels like slightly wishful thinking to my mind. If/when the Russian's do start up a proper offensive, whilst it will be considerably less mechanised and considerably more bloody due to poor training, equipment and leadership I think the Ukrainians will still have a fight on their hands. Quantity has a quality all of its own as the saying goes. Even if that main issue is whether they have a enough bullets for all the Russians they'll need to kill. At some point, Ukraine is going to go on the offensive itself as well. When probably depends on just how effective (or, I suspect not) the Russian offensive is (as well as ground conditions, the next mud season is coming in March/April). But that might be tricky in its own right. Kharkiv in September last year was a success, in part, because the Russian's didn't have the manpower to actually hold the frontage that they held. All it took was to exploit a chink and the whole sector collapsed. Kherson became untenable once HIMARS arrived and started chewing up their logistics and with their back to the Dnieper river. Advancing into the east or Crimea like Ukraine will now need to do, now that the Russian's have bodies to actually man their front line will be trickier.

As for Russia and NATO? Who can say. Russia has been impotent so far and for all their hot air and bluster and threats (actual and implied) have shown themselves to be playing quite a weak hand. They clearly have been utterly wrong footed by our failure to collapse, so far, into bickering and infighting, by the ability of our populations to tough out the high energy prices (aided by a mild winter). And just a general level of resolve that hasn't been demonstrated in quite some time (I still think the farce of the withdrawl from Afghanistan in summer 2021 was one of the key moments that gave him the impetus to act in Ukraine). But who knows how Russia will react if Ukraine does manage to pull off further signficant advances, if they start to threaten restoring to their pre-2014 borders? Or if the West supplies even more advanced equipment like long range rockets such as ATACMS, or cruise missiles like Storm Shadow or fighter jets?

However, while you are right that it can still be grim; a lot of older Russian's remember the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was an economic catastrophe for most people forcing them to sell their most basic possessions (or themselves) on the streets to survive- so today's grim will still be a lot better than that time, which possibly explains the lack of civil discontent amongst the population and more specifically why Putin's support holds amongst the Babushka's.

Anybody in any doubt about the devastating consequences at the end of the Soviet Union, should watch this remarkable series on Iplayer: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/p0d3hwl1/russia-19851999-traumazone

Yep that's fair, and indeed one of Putin's big draws I'd suggest. "No matter what else has happened to us at least since Putin has been in charge things haven't been as bad as the 90s" etc etc.

 

[Gloster]

I wonder if Russia has decided on a war of attrition to grind the Ukrainians down and let the West start squabbling. Continue with small attacks and offensives to keep Ukraine on the hop: so what if Russia loses more soldiers, they have got heaps more to become heaps of bodies. They will reckon that even if they lose more equipment, the West will slowly become more and more reluctant to resupply Ukraine. Particularly if they rattle a few sabres at the West, who will only keep more stuff back to protect themselves. The only thing that would worry them is if the West looks like putting its munitions manufacturing on a war footing and there is little sign of that yet.

 

[Iskra]

I wonder if Russia has decided on a war of attrition to grind the Ukrainians down and let the West start squabbling. Continue with small attacks and offensives to keep Ukraine on the hop: so what if Russia loses more soldiers, they have got heaps more to become heaps of bodies. They will reckon that even if they lose more equipment, the West will slowly become more and more reluctant to resupply Ukraine. Particularly if they rattle a few sabres at the West, who will only keep more stuff back to protect themselves. The only thing that would worry them is if the West looks like putting its munitions manufacturing on a war footing and there is little sign of that yet.

They don't though- Russia is on the cusp of demographic crisis and conscription is already causing labour shortages on the home front, which then translates to an even worse logistical/supply situation. Equally, military logic dictates that when attacking you need a 3 to 1 manpower advantage to succeed (that's assuming actual tactics are used), so by launching costly human wave attacks, Russia is squandering any manpower advantage it has weakening its offensive capability in the long run.

I think the West are quietly happy to take a 'steel not flesh' approach and keep supplying the weapons and let the Ukrainians fight Russia into irrelevance on their behalf. Also remember that munitions go out of date, so if they are just going to go out of date sat in a warehouse, they may as well be shipped to be used rather than just go out of date. A lot of the supplied material is simply surplus, that would just be written-off anyway.

 

[Annetts key]

The only thing that would worry them is if the West looks like putting its munitions manufacturing on a war footing and there is little sign of that yet.

I don’t know about a war footing, but the munitions manufacturers are increasing production. It may take a little while before manufacturing catches up, but I think they will get there now that most western governments realise that this is not going to be a short war.

 

[brad465]

They don't though- Russia is on the cusp of demographic crisis and conscription is already causing labour shortages on the home front, which then translates to an even worse logistical/supply situation. Equally, military logic dictates that when attacking you need a 3 to 1 manpower advantage to succeed (that's assuming actual tactics are used), so by launching costly human wave attacks, Russia is squandering any manpower advantage it has weakening its offensive capability in the long run.

Russia's economy will also take a hit from the whole energy situation: initially high gas prices meant that despite Europe not buying so much the economy was being supported by the high energy prices. Now though gas prices are back down to almost the levels they tended to sit at historically, which combined with Europe appearing to have learned to live without Russian gas is not going to help them.

 

[DustyBin]

How likely is it for there to be some sort of escalation in the near future? I feel like things have been too quiet recently, which makes me fear something big is probably coming soon.

I will admit, I haven't been properly keeping track of things.

There’s the expected spring offensive which may or may not have began already (see previous post by @ainsworth74) but I don’t see that as an escalation per say.

In terms of actual escalation I think there are two main risks; Belarus joining in or something happening in Moldova. The former still seems unlikely for all the reasons we’ve discussed previously, but the latter is quite possible in my opinion. I’m not sure how it would benefit Putin other than by providing a distraction, but following recent events there I sense a vulnerability that Putin may choose to exploit. Whether he has enough resources already in Transnistria to cause a real problem I’m not sure.

 

[ainsworth74]

In terms of actual escalation I think there are two main risks; Belarus joining in or something happening in Moldova. The former still seems unlikely for all the reasons we’ve discussed previously, but the latter is quite possible in my opinion. I’m not sure how it would benefit Putin other than by providing a distraction, but following recent events there I sense a vulnerability that Putin may choose to exploit. Whether he has enough resources already in Transnistria to cause a real problem I’m not sure.

Agreed. Belarus I think will still only play a role in training conscripts and as a staging post for Russian troops. I can't see them joining the war proper for reasons mentioned previously.

Moldova though, that's far more interesting/worrying. I think it's fairly obvious that if Ukraine had folded as expected that Moldova would either have already or would in the near future have come under massive Russian pressure. Whether it was an invasion or a "popular" uprising that just so happened to bring in a government that wanted to closely align with Russia, followed by a "referendum" on joining Russia wholesale it would only be a matter of time before Moldovan independence was a thing of the past. We know that it seems that Russia may well still be planning a coup in Moldova even now:

Russia wants to stage a coup d’état in Moldova, the country’s President Maia Sandu said Monday.

Sandu called for heightened security measures in Moldova after the pro-EU government resigned last week, following months of pressure from Moscow which is waging an all-out war on neighboring Ukraine.

“The plan included sabotage and militarily trained people disguised as civilians to carry out violent actions, attacks on government buildings and taking hostages,” Sandu told reporters at a press conference Monday.

She added that citizens of Russia, Montenegro, Belarus and Serbia would be among those entering Moldova to try to spark protests in an attempt to “change the legitimate government to an illegitimate government, controlled by the Russian Federation to stop the EU integration process.”

Moldova was granted candidate status to the European Union last June, together with Ukraine.

Sandu’s remarks come after she nominated a new prime minister on Friday to keep her country on a pro-EU trajectory after the previous government fell earlier in the day.

“Reports received from our Ukrainian partners indicate the locations and logistical aspects of organizing this subversive activity. The plan also envisages the use of foreigners for violent actions,” she said, adding that earlier statements from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about Russia’s plans to stoke unrest have been confirmed by Moldova’s authorities.

Zelenskyy told EU leaders during Thursday’s European Council summit in Brussels that Ukraine had intercepted Russian plans to “destroy” Moldova, which Moldovan intelligence services later confirmed.

The Moldovan government has long accused Russia, which bases soldiers in the breakaway region of Transnistria in the east, of stirring unrest in the country, including protests in the capital, Chișinău.

Russia is planning coup in Moldova, says President Maia Sandu

‘The plan included sabotage and militarily trained people disguised as civilians to carry out violent actions,’ according to Moldovan leader.

www.politico.eu

If, however, Ukraine prevails I suspect that Moldova will end up being drawn permanently into the EU/Western orbit. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if Moldova invited Ukraine to assist it with dealing with once and for all the Russian troops in Transnistria. Part of me is surprised they haven't already.

But Moldova could be a very interesting place over the coming months. It's an obvious way for Putin to try and open another destabilising front in the conflict and complicate matters for both the West but also Ukraine.

 

[DustyBin]

If, however, Ukraine prevails I suspect that Moldova will end up being drawn permanently into the EU/Western orbit. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if Moldova invited Ukraine to assist it with dealing with once and for all the Russian troops in Transnistria. Part of me is surprised they haven't already.

But Moldova could be a very interesting place over the coming months. It's an obvious way for Putin to try and open another destabilising front in the conflict and complicate matters for both the West but also Ukraine.

I agree; if it comes to it I think Ukraine will help. I suspect the only reason they haven’t already is that it would play into Putin’s hands as he’d accuse Ukraine of invading.

 

[Cloud Strife]

If, however, Ukraine prevails I suspect that Moldova will end up being drawn permanently into the EU/Western orbit. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised if Moldova invited Ukraine to assist it with dealing with once and for all the Russian troops in Transnistria. Part of me is surprised they haven't already.

The issue in Moldova is that there isn't overwhelming public support for dealing with Transnistria. The border was never an 'iron' border, and you can see on Google Maps how open the administrative line is. Here, the street (behind) is in Transnistria, the person taking the picture is standing on the administrative line (possibly just within government-controlled territory) and the pharmacy/water park is already in Moldova. While non-Moldovans (including residents of Transnistria in that) shouldn't cross here, locals will freely cross without going through an official Transnistrian border crossing/Moldovan police checkpoint.

The Moldovan government itself has been quite clear that they seek demilitarisation of Transnistria first and foremost, and then they can think about a political solution. So, going back to your post, I think in the event of Ukraine winning, Transnistria will be very quickly demilitarised by the Ukrainians. The weapons dumps in Transnistria are unlikely to be of much use, and I strongly suspect that the Transnistrian political leadership will simply order the Russian forces out rather than risk open conflict with Ukraine. The Russian forces in Transnistria would last a week at the very most, as they wouldn't be able to cross the Dniester while being surrounded by Ukrainian forces.

But Moldova being drawn into the EU orbit is by no means certain. President Sandu is trying quickly to move Moldova into the Western world, but the energy prices are a major, major issue.

 

[Intercity110]

I think It’s safe to say that Ukraine will last another year. The question is, will it give up any land?

 

[Annetts key]

I think It’s safe to say that Ukraine will last another year. The question is, will it give up any land?

Ukraine will last a lot longer than another year. And no, they have made it very clear they are not prepared to give up any land.

Are Russia prepared to give up any land?

 

[yorksrob]

Well, if the current situation at the United Nations shows, you can't rely on fellowship amongst other countries.

The only thing that counts is more weapons, as fast as can be provided, until the enemy capitulates. The more weapons the West provides, the more quickly, the better.

 

[brad465]

Well, if the current situation at the United Nations shows, you can't rely on fellowship amongst other countries.

The only thing that counts is more weapons, as fast as can be provided, until the enemy capitulates. The more weapons the West provides, the more quickly, the better.

The first 4 tanks from Poland have arrived today.

There are also suggestions that the Wagner group are running low on ammunition, with one possible reason being competition/curbing supplies with the main Russian army:

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

Prigozhin this week was left to cry “treason” over the military allegedly starving his men of ammunition, ending his prison recruitment campaign and stifling praise of Wagner in state media.

 

[Annetts key]

The only thing that counts is more weapons, as fast as can be provided, until the enemy capitulates. The more weapons the West provides, the more quickly, the better.

Yes, I agree, democratic countries should supply whatever conventional weapons that Ukraine wants in order to throw the invaders out of Ukrainian territory.

Every tank, artillery piece, gun, IFV, APC, truck, helicopter, military fixed wing aircraft or warship that Ukraine captures, damages or destroys is less for Russia to use in any attack against anyone else.

 

[yorksrob]

The first 4 tanks from Poland have arrived today.

There are also suggestions that the Wagner group are running low on ammunition, with one possible reason being competition/curbing supplies with the main Russian army:

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

If the Wagner group are running low, now is the time to flood Ukraine with weapons.

There really is no benefit to waiting while Russia regroups.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2023 ==

Yes, I agree, democratic countries should supply whatever conventional weapons that Ukraine wants in order to throw the invaders out of Ukrainian territory.

Every tank, artillery piece, gun, IFV, APC, truck, helicopter, military fixed wing aircraft or warship that Ukraine captures, damages or destroys is less for Russia to use in any attack against anyone else.

Absolutely, now and fast.

The west needs to get the factories up to speed as well.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Feb 2023 ==

The more Communist China swivels around to support this invasion while pretending not to, the more pathetic it looks.

 

[Cloud Strife]

The west needs to get the factories up to speed as well.

Absolutely yes. This is where a real difference can be made, as Ukraine has shown that they can be ruthlessly efficient with using resources if they have them available. There's no harm at this point in really ramping up spending on defence, because Russia simply doesn't have the capability to match it.

There are also suggestions that the Wagner group are running low on ammunition, with one possible reason being competition/curbing supplies with the main Russian army:

I think this is likely to be another Kremlin game. Wagner bought them time, but now that they don't necessarily need them anymore, they're being marginalised. The only surprising thing for me is that Russia didn't put every single convict in uniform and march them to the front.

I think It’s safe to say that Ukraine will last another year. The question is, will it give up any land?

Hard to say. A lot depends on whether Russia really has the ability to keep fighting. The missile strategy has failed, they don't have air supremacy, and they are being torn apart in their thousands in/around Bakhmut. Ukraine will probably lose control of the city sooner rather than later, but they have inflicted a ridiculous amount of damage on Russian troops in the meantime. Russia is gaining ground, but this is clearly at an unsustainable pace. But this is Russia, and they will think nothing of sacrificing a million men to move forward 10km.

On an unrelated note, Hungary is now suggesting that there can be even more delays when it comes to ratifying the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO. At this point, we really should just kick them out of NATO and the EU.

 

[Killingworth]

On an unrelated note, Hungary is now suggesting that there can be even more delays when it comes to ratifying the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO. At this point, we really should just kick them out of NATO and the EU.

Better to keep the current NATO and EU countries together than to lose Hungary from both. Finland and Sweden are in the EU and contributing to the efforts in support of Ukraine as much as most NATO countries. Without being members Russia knows full well they'd get full NATO support if attacked.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed. Make Sweden and Finland members in all but name.

Hungary can be sidelined if it obstructs the rest of NATO's defensive activities.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Better to keep the current NATO and EU countries together than to lose Hungary from both. Finland and Sweden are in the EU and contributing to the efforts in support of Ukraine as much as most NATO countries. Without being members Russia knows full well they'd get full NATO support if attacked.

Hungary also cannot be trusted. They have proven beyond doubt now that they are working Russia's interest, although this has been known for years.

It's one thing to be like Turkey where they see the chance for political concessions, but Hungary is doing this simply to prop up Russia.

 

[Annetts key]

Indeed. Make Sweden and Finland members in all but name.

Hungary can be sidelined if it obstructs the rest of NATO's defensive activities.

If all the N.A.T.O. members other than Hungary sign an agreement with Sweden and Finland that gives them the same protection as if they were in N.A.T.O., that would completely sideline Hungary.

Then Sweden and Finland would have essentially the full protection of being a N.A.T.O. member without actually being a N.A.T.O. member.

Then it can be pointed out to Hungary that any bargaining power they thought they had, has disappeared…

 

[gingerheid]

I think they've already done something similar? It's not quite the same of course. It shows NATO to be divided, and requires duplication of the operational structure of NATO / extra NOTTO training exercises.

 

[birchesgreen]

The Ukrainians are claiming that explosions at an air base in Belarus which damaged a Russian AWACs were by Belarusian partisans (love that retro term). An interesting development if true.

 

[DustyBin]

The Ukrainians are claiming that explosions at an air base in Belarus which damaged a Russian AWACs were by Belarusian partisans (love that retro term). An interesting development if true.

It’s all a bit sketchy, but from what I’ve read it was the partisan group themselves that made the claim. Apparently they used drones to seriously damage the aircraft (an A-50U apparently).

 

[Annetts key]

The Ukrainians are claiming that explosions at an air base in Belarus which damaged a Russian AWACs were by Belarusian partisans (love that retro term). An interesting development if true.

The aircraft that was damaged is reportedly a Beriev A-50U (NATO: Mainstay). Registration RF-50608. It’s a Soviet designed airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft. It’s unclear how many the Russians have in an operational condition. But if reports that the fuselage is badly damaged in at least two places and the radar ‘dome’ is damaged are true, this is a massive loss, both in the loss of operational abilities and in terms of the expense of replacing it (aircraft like this are extremely expensive).
Link to some further information (not quoted as it’s essentially a compilation of user supplied text and photos).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Feb 2023 ==

This story is now on the BBC News website:

Belarusian opposition says it damaged Russian warplane

By Antoinette Radford
BBC News

Exiled Belarusian opposition figures say a Russian military plane has been damaged in a drone attack near the capital, Minsk.

Aliksandr Azarov, leader of Belarusian anti-government organisation BYPOL, claimed responsibility for the attack on Telegram.

The Beriev A-50 early warning aircraft was struck by multiple blasts near the Machulishchy airbase.

It comes amid increased cooperation between Minsk and Moscow.

The strikes damaged front and central parts of the aircraft as well as its radar and antenna, BYPOL said on Telegram.

"These were drones. The participants of the operation are Belarusian", Mr Azarov said.

Speaking to the BBC, Franak Viacorka, an adviser to Belarusian opposition leader, said the attack was "creative" and "sophisticated".

"It was very brave because Belarusians are in a situation of the total terror", he told BBC News.

He added that the opposition party was "definitely helped by locals, helped by military" to cause damage to the plane.

However, it is not possible to confirm the opposition's account of what happened.

Both the Russian and Belarusian departments of defence are yet to publicly comment on the incident.

BYPOL, the group that has claimed responsibility for the strike on the aircraft, consists of former law enforcement officers now opposed to President Alexander Lukashenko's office.

It has been listed as a terrorist organisation by Mr Lukashenko's government.

While Belarus has not directly become involved in the war in Ukraine, Mr Lukashenko allowed Russian troops to launch into Ukraine through Belarus.

The two countries have also been participating in joint military training exercises over recent months.

Link to the report on the BBC News site.