Great Power contentions

[Pannonian]

They still haven't been able to excavate the rubble from the Mariupol Drama Theater, which was bombed a week ago. Nevertheless hard to imagine civilian casualties in Mariupol though.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1506630965766070272 [VIDEO]

It's about time for transgovernmental management of the global food supply and its distribution (almost all Yemenis and Afghans are suffering food scarcity).

The problem in many areas with food supply issues is war, not the general availability of food. As long as that's not solved, you're not going to solve the local food supply problem.

[rory_20_uk]

Food and water are tools of control in many countries in the world. Used correctly it can even be a way to monetise one's own population who are too poor to pay conventional taxes - but when the UN comes a-running with fee food that can be stolen, permits and other import taxes can be demanded and things can be sold to their staff. All that lovely hard currency - and the poor, starving peasants are unlikely to revolt.

And this of course is excluding when just starving people to death is the aim.

Lack of access therefore isn't a problem to be "fixed", it is something to use.

[Montmorency]

Holy crap, the Russian military has released a war map. It's surprisingly conservative, in some places even compared with most Western mappers. Meanwhile, Yuri insists that Makariv is under Russian control and the Kyiv regime is momentarily to flee the city.





Kherson is reportedly contested again.

DoD's cutting F-35 procurement?

Seems like Azerbaijan is officially recommencing its designs on Karabakh while Russia is distracted. Restraint is just too much to ask for in the Degenerate Age. I can't think of anyone else on the planet who wants this, other than Turkey, who always takes an opportunity to kick down at Armenia by all appearances.

The problem in many areas with food supply issues is war, not the general availability of food. As long as that's not solved, you're not going to solve the local food supply problem.

True, but only to a point - and Afghanistan and Yemen are in a 10-year lull for internal warfare anyway. There's a difference between persistent nutritional insecurity and mass famine, and these are very particular times for global and regional food supplies.

Food and water are tools of control in many countries in the world. Used correctly it can even be a way to monetise one's own population who are too poor to pay conventional taxes - but when the UN comes a-running with fee food that can be stolen, permits and other import taxes can be demanded and things can be sold to their staff. All that lovely hard currency - and the poor, starving peasants are unlikely to revolt.

And this of course is excluding when just starving people to death is the aim.

Lack of access therefore isn't a problem to be "fixed", it is something to use.

The usage is that we don't have a mechanism for controlling millions of starving people. I know Europe is relatively enthusiastic about absorbing millions of Ukrainian refugees, but one would think the lesson was learned by 2015. Or else, you'd better be sure that all those people will croak before they get a chance to cause impinge on you if there's no money or resources to take care of them abroad.

[Montmorency]

Ukraine's allies, in the first week of the war, sent 17,000 MANPAT. Unless this war ends this spring, it is almost certain Russia will suffer more total casualties than the US did in the entire Vietnam War.

One factor in Ukraine's persistent defense of trans-Dnieper Zaporizhzhia and Donbas I callously hadn't considered before is that it is in Ukraine's long-term national interest to preserve as many of its major population/urban centers as possible. Unless the military necessity is absolute, allowing major cities like Dnipro and Zaporizhzhia to come under withering and extended barrage against entrenched and west-bank defenders would lead to the permanent loss of tens of thousands of civilians and irreplaceable national heritage, to say nothing of damage to commerce, industry, infrastructure, and even tourism that would long hamper any Ukrainian recovery.

Better to expend many thousands of soldiers if doing so averts the sacrifice of national viscera. At least with Mariupol and other border cities it was understood that they would never survive any proper war - hence their anochronistic designation as a Hero Cities by Zelensky.

[spmetla]

It's about time for transgovernmental management of the global food supply and its distribution (almost all Yemenis and Afghans are suffering food scarcity).

I agree but local agriculture needs to be encouraged in these areas too. I recall all too well the southern Afghan poppy and marijuana fields abound because no one grew food as it wasn't profitable enough and didn't come with cash/seed lending from the smugglers. If there were trans-governmental subsidies to staple crop growers as well to encourage food growth instead of cash crops this would help to alleviate the problem to some degree and reduce the cycle of aid dependency.
Part of the problem is of course the destroyed economies in those areas so that even though food may be available it remains out of reach. This problem can't be really fixed though in Yemen or Afghanistan where years of war of upset the local economies and the continuing hostilities and political problems prevent any reinvestment in countries that no one really cares about until their refugees arrive. A problem that's exasperated by these populations continuing to grow despite an inability to sustain even the current population.
Yemen won't have peace until Iran and the Saudis solve their problems. The Taliban continue to renege on promised reforms which will continue to result in reduced aid support.

Seems like Azerbaijan is officially recommencing its designs on Karabakh while Russia is distracted. Restraint is just too much to ask for in the Degenerate Age. I can't think of anyone else on the planet who wants this, other than Turkey, who always takes an opportunity to kick down at Armenia by all appearances.

Georgia too has rumblings in parts of their establishment to try and retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia too, even Japan has been underlining their claims to the Kuril Islands. Guess that's the problem when conflicts are 'frozen' instead of resolved. Moldova would like to have the Transdniestria enclave resolved too. A lot of hyenas hoping for a Russian collapse, something that'd also be a disaster for the world in essentially allowing for landgrabs to lead to several more small regional wars. I want Putin's regime to change to something a little less at odds with the world order, not the total collapse of the Russian Federation.

DoD's cutting F-35 procurement?

That caught me by surprise too. I think this is some DoD 4D chess happening, by spending their budget on other things and leaving something absolutely necessary underfunded with a reduction to the order their lobbyists and pocket politicians can push for an increased budget.
There's also the possibility that this may allow the production line to send those F-35s to the buyers in Europe that are still waiting for more to arrive given that even Germany has finally settled on it as its Tornado replacement. Think the F-35 will be essentially the NATO/Western standard multirole aircraft in future decades.

Kherson is reportedly contested again.

I'm tracking the area around it is contested for sure but it's the type of terrain the heavily favors the Russians more heavily mechanized and motorized forces. Given the lackluster performance of the Russians in urban combat so far I can't see them holding Kherson if the UA gets a good foothold in the city but a decent chance of holding it if they can keep the fight on the open plains to the west. Seems to be just about all open farmland with only scattered houses, a few villages, and very few forested areas so the absolute ideal for mounted warfare, even if restricted to the major roads as flanks are mostly in clear view.

Given the stalemate NW and NE of Kiev I'm actually surprised that the Russians aren't just pulling back from those areas completely to focus their efforts on the East and South. They've still been a better army when fighting in open areas so why not focus on the areas that seem to line up with the reduced campaign goals. Perhaps Putin also has the 'no step back' mentality of Hitler.
Just makes me wonder what the current military objectives are for the Russians. Taking the country seems to be off the table so if the new goals are land corridor to Crimea and all of the contested East the focus efforts there. If they really intend to just dig in and try to negotiate terms, I think we'll see the encirclements I hope for. Being on defense gives the initiative to the enemy and generally is harder on morale than the offense (so long as the attacks are well planned, not cannon fodder style). If the Ukrainians start making any significant gains in their counterattacks the morale effect on the Russians will be much more magnified than if they just left areas that have stalemated and focused on areas that line up with political objectives and the strengths of their own army.

[Montmorency]

The Russian MoD briefing today, from which I posted their official war map, included the claim that everything is going to plan because Russia only ever intended to seize the rest of Donestk and Luhansk - the only territory they're having much success in.

I suspect this is a face-saving gesture, for all the reasons covered in the thread. But I can acknowledge the possibility of branching plans in Russian stretegy. Even so, for an opportunist like Putin the dream of taking the whole country was at the forefront, and the current disposition is as near to total failure as Russian planners could have envisioned.

In the plausible case that Russia contests over the currently-occupied territory for months to come, the time is ripe for NATO to send non-Soviet equipment and train Ukrainian operators on it. A couple months' training will be an adequate start for Ukraine on many systems; old Cold War-era stocks can't hold out forever.

[Pannonian]

The Russian MoD briefing today, from which I posted their official war map, included the claim that everything is going to plan because Russia only ever intended to seize the rest of Donestk and Luhansk - the only territory they're having much success in.

I suspect this is a face-saving gesture, for all the reasons covered in the thread. But I can acknowledge the possibility of branching plans in Russian stretegy. Even so, for an opportunist like Putin the dream of taking the whole country was at the forefront, and the current disposition is as near to total failure as Russian planners could have envisioned.

In the plausible case that Russia contests over the currently-occupied territory for months to come, the time is ripe for NATO to send non-Soviet equipment and train Ukrainian operators on it. A couple months' training will be an adequate start for Ukraine on many systems; old Cold War-era stocks can't hold out forever.

Can't they just hand over the equipment and tell them to google for instructions? It seems to be how untrained Ukrainian operators have been learning how to use captured Russian equipment.

[Montmorency]

Potential Ukrainian war crimes - the serious kind - against POWs. Terribly stupid if true - and it looks legitimate.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1507975846384082945 [VIDEO - CW]
https://twitter.com/i/status/1507975823290216448 [VIDEO - CW]

And some potential war crimes against Ukrainian POWs.
https://twitter.com/KremlinTrolls/st...06637694476304 [VIDEO - CW]

[Montmorency]

Chief presidential adviser Arestovich confirmed that the footage merits an investigation and reasserted the need to treat POWs (even) better than civilians. Very acute intellect on that man btw, so this is reassuring to hear from him.

It's increasingly probable that Azerbaijan will go loud in Karabakh, not that there's much standing in their way. On the other hand it would be quite a break from Azerbaijan's formerly-foremost ally, and would demand some kind of severe response from Putin as a greater blow to his prestige and authority than anything in Ukraine so far. Though it's not clear what options Russia would have.

On March 25, during the telephone conversation between #Azerbaijan Defense Minister Col Gen Zakir Hasanov and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, the situation in the territory of Azerbaijan, where the Russian peacekeeping forces are temporarily stationed, was discussed.

The Azerbaijani side stated that the positions and deployment locations are being clarified on spot.

However, in the morning of March 26, members of #IllegalArmenianarmeddetachments attempted to sabotage the #AzerbaijanArmy Units. As a result of immediate measures, members of illegal Armenian armed detachments were forced to retreat.

The Defense Ministry states that Azerbaijan is committed to the Joint Statement of November 10, 2020 and has not violated any of the provisions.

We regretably inform that the withdrawal of the remnants of the Armenian army and illegal Armenian armed detachments from the territory of Azerbaijan in accordance with article 4 of this Statement has not yet been completed.

Therefore, it is Armenia, not Azerbaijan, that violates the provisions of the Statement.

The Ministry of Defense states that the statement of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation contradicts the essence of bilateral relations and the Declaration on Allied Interaction signed between the two countries on February 22, 2022.

There is no administrative and territorial unit called "Nagorno-Karabakh" in the territory of Azerbaijan. The name of the village mentioned in the statement is not Furukh, but Farrukh.

The MoD of the Republic of Azerbaijan requests the MoD of the Russian Federation to completely withdraw the remnants of the Armenian army and illegal Armenian armed detachments from the territory of ���� recognized by the international community.

In accordance with the provisions of the Joint Statement, Azerbaijan asks not to use the term "Nagorno-Karabakh" and correctly indicate the names of the territories of Azerbaijan.

Russia says Azerbaijan enters peacekeepers' zone in Nagorno-Karabakh, Baku denies it

Russia's defence ministry said on Saturday Azeri armed forces had entered a zone policed by Russian peacekeepers in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, in a violation of an agreement, but Azerbaijan challenged these claims.

Russia said it had called on Azerbaijan to pull out its troops, and was "applying efforts" to move forces to their initial positions. It also said Azerbaijan had carried out four drone strikes in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Astonishing headline: "Some foreign fighters eager to join the Ukrainian cause have found the experience unexpectedly frightening and dangerous"

[spmetla]

Chief presidential adviser Arestovich confirmed that the footage merits an investigation and reasserted the need to treat POWs (even) better than civilians. Very acute intellect on that man btw, so this is reassuring to hear from him.

I'm sure there's countless abuses on both sides, glad that it's being investigated but doubt many resources will be allocated to that. Given the poor training of a lot of the troops on both sides (especially the newly mobilized Ukrainians and Russian conscripts) I'm sure we'll see plenty more. War saps people's humanity.

It's increasingly probable that Azerbaijan will go loud in Karabakh, not that there's much standing in their way. On the other hand it would be quite a break from Azerbaijan's formerly-foremost ally, and would demand some kind of severe response from Putin as a greater blow to his prestige and authority than anything in Ukraine so far. Though it's not clear what options Russia would have.

I'm worried that they'll go to war too. Russia was not capable of much intervention last year and now look almost powerless and with Turkey as the security guarantee the Azeris will probably never see such another opportunity in a long time to 'fix' their borders. If Georgia didn't share a border with Russia, I'm sure they'd be seriously considering the same.

Astonishing headline: "Some foreign fighters eager to join the Ukrainian cause have found the experience unexpectedly frightening and dangerous"

Given that so many western volunteers are coming from rich, well-funded militaries, with a high premium on individual welfare I'm not surprised that they'd be shocked by the low-quality equipment, training, and extreme danger. Even 'veterans' of the last 20 years of small wars won't know the terror of enemy artillery, tanks, UAVs, and having to live and fight in extreme conditions for days on end. No FOB to go home to and watch Netflix while facetiming the wife.
The killing potential in high intensity conflict is terrible, I think a lot of Americans forget that the US was expected up to 15,000 casualties to force Iraq out of Kuwait, it was to be the "Mother of All Battles" as no one expected the Western technological advantage to so completely overwhelm a 'veteran and battle-hardened' force like the Iraqis, especially the Republican Guard.

Too many people, especially in the US think that war is easy and that technology makes the hard parts unnecessary or avoidable. They forget the US has fought 'easy' opponents recently. Like I said a few weeks ago, imagine how hard the Iraq war would had been if the Iraqis had actually tried as a whole nation to fight the US invasion. The US was very lucky that Iraqi morale and sense of national patriotism over tribal affiliation wasn't stronger, not to mention that they didn't 'study the knife' as you've pointed out Ukraine has done the last eight years.

[Montmorency]

I understand all sides in all wars commit at least some excesses, but it's still stupid. In the most mediatized war ever, it doesn't take compassion - short currency amid the brutalization of violent masculinity - to hold back from vengeful destruction in cold blood, and documenting it at that. It's on a whole other level from demeaning or berating prisoners, which we've seen in other footage. Even the crudest instrumentality requires Ukraine to maximize its prisoner-taking potential among the target, the Russian soldier.

This is very important to handle during the war so that it doesn't become an albatross for future generations. We're not even close to publicly reckoning with the follies of the War on Terror in the US, let alone the specific atrocities numbered within it; even recognizing that slavery was bad is a locus of catastrophic political struggle. Russia's failure to understand the crimes of the Stalin era, and of the USSR during and before WW2, go a long way toward explaining why it fell to fascism the way it did. Russia's post-war self-conception and historiography has been even more jingoistic and self-glorifying than America's, hard as that may be to believe.

Truth and reconciliation sooner rather than later is always in humanity's interest beyond borders. Even better is to do one's best to play it clean in the first place.

EDIT:

According to @bellingcat the Russian FSB paid billions of $ to ensure that some shadowy political class in Ukraine supported this war & created an internal coup d'état immediately after the invasion. But Ukrainian agents who took the money ditched them.They just screwed them over

I think this report must be legit, because Yuri had a video complaining about just this a week or two ago. I may also have posted about his bitter proclamation that the double-agent debacle should become an opportunity to cleanse Ukraine of oligarchs as Russia rebuilds it in Russia's vision.

[Montmorency]

I sense a buddy comedy script.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

While heartened that the Ukrainian forces have pushed the Russians back during this enforced operational pause, as the last map in post #363 above makes clear, the Ukrainians are NOT encircling and entrapping the movement echelons but cutting them off. They are attriting them and pushing them back.

[rory_20_uk]

While heartened that the Ukrainian forces have pushed the Russians back during this enforced operational pause, as the last map in post #363 above makes clear, the Ukrainians are NOT encircling and entrapping the movement echelons but cutting them off. They are attriting them and pushing them back.

Realistically, if they were able to cut them off Russia would have no choice but to pull out all the stops to break out since the loss of prestige with such a calamity would be worse than further sanctions. And as a complete amateur I would have thought man portable weaponry are great at ambushes but poor at properly seizing and holding in a battalion or so. If the equipment Russia is fielding continues to be of poor quality, won't constant pressure ensure morale remains rock bottom and heavy material is dumped as soon as there's a glitch, lest there's another missile from some fox hole?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Realistically, if they were able to cut them off Russia would have no choice but to pull out all the stops to break out since the loss of prestige with such a calamity would be worse than further sanctions. And as a complete amateur I would have thought man portable weaponry are great at ambushes but poor at properly seizing and holding in a battalion or so. If the equipment Russia is fielding continues to be of poor quality, won't constant pressure ensure morale remains rock bottom and heavy material is dumped as soon as there's a glitch, lest there's another missile from some fox hole?

I rather think it does, and the Ukrainians have been using this to good effect so far. I am just lamenting that the Ukrainians do not appear to have the offensive combat power necessary to surround one or two of the penetrations and crush them. As was noted above, such losses would be concentrated among maneuver forces and erode Russian capability even more. But things are as they are, not as we would wish.

[Montmorency]

As it happens, the Russians have professed that as a show of good faith during the ongoing negotiations, they will "fundamentally cut back military activity in the direction of Kyiv and Chernigiv” in order to “increase mutual trust for future negotiations to agree and sign a peace deal with Ukraine.” The DoD and other Western observers are marking the withdrawal of some units north of Kyiv into Belarus. They speculate that Russia is using the time to reconstitute units, potentially to reposition to Donbass, or even to correct the forward line in the Kyiv suburbs, that famous salient. Similar developments have been observed throughout the northeast of Ukraine, around still-standing Chernihiv and Sumy.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thermal mapping of Kyiv and Mariupol fronts (can reflect both source and target).

[spmetla]

Meanwhile in other news Russia may annex South Ossetia soon:
South Ossetia has legal grounds to join Russia — parliament speaker
Alan Tadtayev noted that since 1774, when Ossetia joined Russia, there haven’t been a single document declaring its secession from Russia
https://tass.com/world/1429977<br />...rer=google.com
South Ossetia to hold referendum to join Russia in future - report
Officially, South Ossetia is recognized by most countries as being part of Georgia, though Georgia has no de facto control over it
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-702755

The pro-Russian Georgian breakaway South Ossetia is set to hold a public referendum to fully join Russia, South Ossential parliament Speaker Alan Tadtaev told Russia's TASS news agency on Wednesday.

"We have every reason to join the Russian Federation and there are no legal obstacles to this," Tadtaev added.

"I believe that unification with Russia is our strategic goal, our path, the aspiration of the people," President Anatoly Bibilov, was quoted as saying by the press service of the United Russia Party.

"We will take the relevant legal steps in the near future. The republic of South Ossetia will be part of its historical homeland - Russia."

All necessary legal procedures for South Ossetia to join Russia will be finished around April 10 to coincide with the South Ossetian presidential elections, presidential press secretary Dina Gassieva told TASS.

While I'm kind of the opinion that if the people of South Ossetia really don't want to be part of Georgia they shouldn't have to be, especially as they've been defacto independent for decades. However, Russia annexing another country that's internationally still recognized as part of Georgia seems a big 'no no' for me.

Finding a way to 'correct' borders still remains a major problem within the UN framework. Creating new countries like Kosovo or South Ossetia is a major problem that should require buy-in from the country they are seceding from in some form.
This is why things like Taiwan will remain major problems for a long time as there isn't a way for the country losing said province to 'save face' and accept what may be de facto conditions forever.

[Montmorency]

Joe Biden has authorized the release of 1 million bpd from the Strategic Oil Reserve over the next 6 months. It was a much-promoted option for reducing inflationary pressure at the gas pump (and beyond), and therefore buying the midterm votes of the common clay. This is what applied political science looks like.

Japan has rejected all negotiations with Russia over the Kuril Islands and proclaimed them illegally-occupied territory. I highly doubt the presence of any military component to this policy change.

DoD estimated that 70-75% of total Russian military power is committed to Ukraine, presumably of the ground force in particular.

The Russians have abandoned Hostomel (Antonov) Airport, just north of Irpin/Kyiv. Here is a POV video taken from an apartment maybe a kilometer away from the airport on the day of the invasion, when a swarm of helis brazenly inserted VDV into the airport with Ride of the Valkyries blaring (I like to imagine). The same day that CNN reporters on the scene encountered the Russian vanguard and filmed them from a block away exchanging fire with the Ukrainians. More than a month ago now, and much of the area has since been devastated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota...tomel_airport/

Speculation that Russians stationed in the Chernobyl exclusion zone have been coming down with acute radiation poisoning for not minding the hotspots.

US Air Force procurement proposals. My only qualm is investment in nuclear (presumably beyond maintenance).

AF proposes cutting 150 aircraft: U.S. Air Force leaders want to shed hundreds of “unnecessary” planes and drones and spend more on nuclear and high-tech weapons they say are better suited for a war with China or Russia. They lay out their proposal in the service’s $169 billion 2023 spending request, which is $13.2 billion higher than last year’s request. The service is asking for approval to retire 150 aircraft, including eight E-8 JSTARS radar planes, 21 A-10 attack planes, 33 F-22 training jets, 15 E-3 Sentry AWACS-carrying radar planes, 13 KC-135 aerial refueling tankers, 10 C-130H cargo planes, and 50 T-1 trainers.

AWACS replacement: Speaking of AWACS, the Air Force’s new budget request includes about $225 million to start replacing decades-old E-3s with...well, it’s not quite decided. But a “leading candidate” is the E-7 Wedgetail, a Boeing aircraft flown by several allies, Marcus Weisgerber reports.

Meanwhile in other news Russia may annex South Ossetia soon:
South Ossetia has legal grounds to join Russia — parliament speaker
Alan Tadtayev noted that since 1774, when Ossetia joined Russia, there haven’t been a single document declaring its secession from Russia
https://tass.com/world/1429977<br />...rer=google.com
South Ossetia to hold referendum to join Russia in future - report
Officially, South Ossetia is recognized by most countries as being part of Georgia, though Georgia has no de facto control over it
https://www.jpost.com/international/article-702755


While I'm kind of the opinion that if the people of South Ossetia really don't want to be part of Georgia they shouldn't have to be, especially as they've been defacto independent for decades. However, Russia annexing another country that's internationally still recognized as part of Georgia seems a big 'no no' for me.

Finding a way to 'correct' borders still remains a major problem within the UN framework. Creating new countries like Kosovo or South Ossetia is a major problem that should require buy-in from the country they are seceding from in some form.
This is why things like Taiwan will remain major problems for a long time as there isn't a way for the country losing said province to 'save face' and accept what may be de facto conditions forever.

It's a battle between international order and the law of the jungle.

Contemporary IR scholars have been foolish to discount the geoeconomics of conquest, as though raw resources and population somehow no longer mattered in the digital age. It's just that corporate hegemony is a preferable weapon to war for the ruling classes; doesn't mean war can't possibly pay, even if in most cases it won't. The Project for a New American Century neocons wanted to do the same thing in Iraq after all, just without the annexation - they too badly miscalculated. What Putin, another stupid authoritarian, overlooked is that there's more ruin in an America than there is in a Russia.

[rory_20_uk]

Finding a way to 'correct' borders still remains a major problem within the UN framework. Creating new countries like Kosovo or South Ossetia is a major problem that should require buy-in from the country they are seceding from in some form.
This is why things like Taiwan will remain major problems for a long time as there isn't a way for the country losing said province to 'save face' and accept what may be de facto conditions forever.

Although there has so far not been a way to codify how countries morph over time, reality continues with a much simpler "might is right" approach where if an area can be either overcome by another, or resist domination then there is essentially a change in countries. Tibet isn't a country whereas Taiwan is.

That countries that cede land are the exception rather than the rule is why all those at the UN are more interested in keeping what they have rather than assisting - democratic countries are all about the wishes of the people until they want to leave (as we can see in examples such as Spain).

But then the UN has its rules mainly outlined by international lawyers whose lives are cloistered to a point where hardship is pretty much unheard of. I think we also see this with the "rules of war" which do not seem to have asked what those who have been at the edge of the meat grinder - often forgiving senior commanders who direct the bombing whilst expecting soldiers to be able to act as robots with treating those who have just killed their comrades as utterly neutral persons. It is a nice thought where the person needs to be distinct from the soldier but surely a yardstick as opposed to a criminal code. But invariably the rules are only enforced on the loosers.

[Montmorency]

Holy shit. The Russians are outright abandoning the North, along with an indeterminate quantity of men and materiel. Also today, it appears the Ukrainians sent gunships to strike a fuel depot in Belgorod, on the Russian side of the border. This entire war so far has been Ukraine coming up aces.

whilst expecting soldiers to be able to act as robots with treating those who have just killed their comrades as utterly neutral persons. :

Don't have to be robots, this is acceptable from the available footage.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota..._to_ukrainian/ [VIDEO]

It must be acknowledged that seeing POWs activates my vestigial nurturing instincts in some special way though.

[Montmorency]

For some reason, the towns Russia is abandoning are lined with civilian corpses. The most reassuring thing that can be said about it is that the Russians have left behind literal heaps of their own as well.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1509985789404459011 [VIDEO]
https://twitter.com/J_B_E__Zorg/stat...05388950876168

Rory, just for interest here is a legal analysis of the role of commanders in war crimes.
https://lieber.westpoint.edu/command...aine-conflict/

The concept of command responsibility, also known as superior responsibility, stems from IHL (see Amann), being rooted in Article 1(1) of the 1899 Hague Regulations and eventually codified in 1977 in Articles 86(2) and 87 of Additional Protocol I (AP I). It is now deemed a norm of customary nature applicable to all States (see Commentary to Rule 153 of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law).

While the Allies prosecuted commanders after the Second World War (e.g., Yamashita, von Leeb) one had to await the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) (Article 7(3)) and that of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Article 6(3)) for a codified and refined definition of command responsibility. The latest international iteration is found in Article 28 of the Statute of the ICC. The Court has clearly stated that command responsibility is a sui generis mode of liability used to hold criminally responsible military superiors for the crimes committed by their subordinates (paras 171, 174).

[rory_20_uk]

The Allies did charge and convict enemy commanders yet none of their own - not just they were not found guilty but none of them did anything worth looking into.

How many commanders from the conflicts in Iraq, Lybia, Syria, Palestine, Vietnam, Afghanistan etc have been investigated let alone charged? Any at all? And in the USA the President is Commander in Chief, so he should be the one to be held accountable.

Without an unconditional surrender in Ukraine by Russia which is bordering on impossible, only Ukrainian soldiers and commanders would be held responsible which seems risible. Again, white collar lawyers codifying something of itself doesn't really achieve anything.

[Montmorency]

The Allies did charge and convict enemy commanders yet none of their own - not just they were not found guilty but none of them did anything worth looking into.

How many commanders from the conflicts in Iraq, Lybia, Syria, Palestine, Vietnam, Afghanistan etc have been investigated let alone charged? Any at all? And in the USA the President is Commander in Chief, so he should be the one to be held accountable.

Without an unconditional surrender in Ukraine by Russia which is bordering on impossible, only Ukrainian soldiers and commanders would be held responsible which seems risible. Again, white collar lawyers codifying something of itself doesn't really achieve anything.

I can see that. On the other hand - you could look at it as better than nothing. Should then the Americans never have charged anyone involved in My Lai (and there were many lesser such incidents) on account of the North Vietnamese getting away with their crimes? More broadly, should there be no courts or jails in one country because criminals in another aren't effectively brought to justice? While an eliminationist would assent to that as a backdoor to their ends, it seems backwards enough that no one would agree with the logic outright I think.

Chief executives are usually commanders in chief, so in principle you charge them with decisions to go to war or with specific criminal policies/orders.

[CrossLOPER]

Someone should make a bingo chart of this conflict, because that would be the only salvageable thing from whatever this was.

My apologies, I am being too enthusiastic. The conflict IS.

[Montmorency]

Numerous reports of recaptured areas around Kyiv being strewn with corpses and mass graves, with civilians reporting that the occupation was characterized by theft, torture, rape, and execution, seemingly in line with the Kremlin's pre-war assessed intent to eliminate political dissent and named anti-Russian elements of society.




Elsewhere, the Wagner Group (Liga) is alleged to have assisted two weeks ago in mass murder in Mali, where they maintain a presence.

Why do the Russophobes always smear Russia so in all of its self-defense efforts?

The situation in Russia described perfectly. (Tip: It tells the whole truth, but inverted exactly)

Summary: The vast majority of Ukrainians are passive Nazis who must be reeducated and subject to severe cultural-ideological suppression and reeducation (De-Ukrainization and De-Europeanization, since "Nazi Ukraine" is a European project). Ukraine must pay (atone) for its crimes against Russia through terror and violence and be treated as an enemy until that generational reconstruction is complete. It will involve total Russian government control over Ukrainian society and the division of the unnatural Ukrainian state into dozens of non-threatening statelets. Banderists cannot be reeducated and must be liquidated (killed) as a class. All of this is the writer's exact terminology, published in some of the most elite of Russian state media. It's the same outlet that on February 26 published and retracted an article describing the ideological need for Russia to restore itself in the contest for world domination against Anglo-American civilization by conquering Ukraine.

So yeah, Russian fascism demands genocide as resolution to the Ukrainian Question, genocide of the Stalinist character. Not that the Russians should be genocided in the way the writer lays out, but some vigorous cleansing is certainly in order.

Meanwhile, the US Department of Defense commissioned a study into civilian harms during the Battle of Raqqa. With such instruments one can at least hope for improvement:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The battle for Raqqa, Syria, seemed like a perfect storm of strategic and operational challenges. When the city was finally liberated from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in October 2017, 60 to 80 percent of it was estimated to be uninhabitable. In fact, the battle for Raqqa is a cautionary tale about civilian harm in 21st-century conflicts.

The purpose of this report is to discuss how the U.S. military — which is the best-trained and most technologically advanced military in the world, is supported in Operation Inherent Resolve by an international coalition of more than 80 countries, and was partnered in Raqqa with a well-respected militia force on the ground — could cause significant civilian harm despite a deeply ingrained commitment to the law of war.

In this report, RAND researchers study the causes of civilian harm in Raqqa and provide insights into how the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) can reduce civilian harm in future operations.

Key Findings
U.S. strategic choices, such as the encirclement of Raqqa, likely increased civilian harm.
The coalition made considerable efforts to protect civilian life, but there remains room for improvement.
Civilian casualties in Raqqa were not as high as one might predict, given the high levels of structural damage.
ISIS's defensive tactics deliberately put civilians in harm's way.
Extensive structural damage in Raqqa undermined post-battle governing prospects and long-term U.S. interests.
Airpower was not used to shape the battlefield in Raqqa, which made civilian-harm mitigation more difficult.
Restrictions on U.S. ground forces made preventing civilian harm more difficult.
Irregular partner forces were less precise than U.S. forces would be and increased the risk of civilian harm.
A lack of sources to provide better local information impeded civilian-harm mitigation efforts.
Flawed DoD processes and poor collection of civilian casualty data hindered the military's ability to assess and analyze civilian harm in Raqqa.
Recommendations
Prior to the start of military operations, DoD must take a broader approach to civilian harm that considers how strategic choices might affect civilian-harm risks.
DoD can improve its application of targeting processes, targeting tools, and force preparation.
DoD should harness the considerable lessons learned from Raqqa — and from past operations — to better prepare ground forces, pilots, and targeting teams for future urban engagements, partly through improved education and training.
An increased emphasis on information operations could reduce civilian-harm risk.
Partnering efforts between the United States and local forces should prioritize strategies and tactics to mitigate civilian harm during military operations.
The U.S. military and intelligence community should investigate opportunities to develop tools and practices that improve understanding of the civilian environment and better leverage open-source intelligence, publicly available information, and human intelligence.
DoD must take several steps to improve its ability to assess and investigate civilian harm, including improving collection and analysis of civilian casualty data, simplifying reporting procedures and making them consistent, and establishing criteria for when the military should conduct site visits.
DoD must go beyond the identification of lessons regarding civilian harm — exemplified in this study but also in past studies on civilian harm — and ensure that they are acted on.

In military affairs, I'm reading that the Russian military is releasing its termed-out conscripts per protocol, presumably to be replaced only by the class now having completed advanced training (though even these are not to be sent to Ukraine according to Russian law and persistent assurances). This is a very surprising development to me, since the Russian armed forces really cannot afford to shed more than one-hundred thousand trained soldiers while protracting a war that has absorbed almost all Russian active military combat potential.

Meanwhile, it seems like they're really just going to cast about another 100K enlisted from all nationally-available forces plus the survivors of the northern theater at a narrow front around the Donets River. (For context, up to now the large majority of all Russian forces committed to the invasion were assessed to be operating between Kharkiv and Kyiv.)

If they fail to at least dislodge the Ukrainian defensive line in Donetsk, the Russian military simply does not retain available manpower to continue offensive operations in Ukraine at scale. The war cannot continue as a "special military operation." Either Putin breaks the Donbass front this month, fails and declares total war in a multi-year national mobilization, or gives up.

In the first scenario the Ukrainians WILL eventually reconquer all occupied territory other than Crimea. It would be inevitable.


Schlotmann's map overlaying the LiveUA map with Russian formation deployments is here. Unfortunately, while it probably identifies Russian parent formations well, it's typically unable to suggest a determination on the principal AOs of maybe half of Russia's BTGs in the theater. It will also likely be much more of a historical resource than a quasi-real time one.
https://uawardata.com/

Eventually we have a page for each Russian unit with its starting equipment, commander, history, awards. Ukrainian unit information will be added following the conclusion of hostilities. We will also go back and add information for each day

[spmetla]

Someone should make a bingo chart of this conflict, because that would be the only salvageable thing from whatever this was.

My apologies, I am being too enthusiastic. The conflict IS.

I know, there's only a few items of warfare missing like surface naval battles, bayonet charges, cavalry charges, chemical warfare, and of course nuclear warfare.

Numerous reports of recaptured areas around Kyiv being strewn with corpses and mass graves, with civilians reporting that the occupation was characterized by theft, torture, rape, and execution, seemingly in line with the Kremlin's pre-war assessed intent to eliminate political dissent and named anti-Russian elements of society.

These atrocities certainly make it difficult for peace to come, even were Zelensky willing to cave to all of Russia's demands right now for peace these atrocities make it so the Ukrainian populace won't accept such terms.
It's absolutely disgusting what the Russians have done there, it's only been a few weeks too, not like its revenge on some long running insurgent band of anti-Russians.

It is crazy though to see how people still seem in such denial that the Russian Army did this. They really think these are all staged massacres or 'false flag' operations to smear the Russian state.

Meanwhile, the US Department of Defense commissioned a study into civilian harms during the Battle of Raqqa. With such instruments one can at least hope for improvement:

The US may be callous in regard to 'collateral' but it at least does try. Our common Soldiers generally do the right thing and the record has shown that the US tends to get better at minimizing civilian casualties overtime.

Meanwhile, it seems like they're really just going to cast about another 100K enlisted from all nationally-available forces plus the survivors of the northern theater at a narrow front around the Donets River. (For context, up to now the large majority of all Russian forces committed to the invasion were assessed to be operating between Kharkiv and Kyiv.)

If they fail to at least dislodge the Ukrainian defensive line in Donetsk, the Russian military simply does not retain available manpower to continue offensive operations in Ukraine at scale. The war cannot continue as a "special military operation." Either Putin breaks the Donbass front this month, fails and declares total war in a multi-year national mobilization, or gives up.

It will be interesting to watch, the terrain favors the Russians but the time of the year and weather the Ukraine. The numbers are impressive but I'm just wondering how effective it will be, the element of surprise is gone, the UA sees victory as possible, morale is high, and they are getting continued support from the West. Even some armored vehicles and more potent systems too though nothing yet from top-tier NATO stores besides man-portable missiles.
The Russians on the other side will certainly have learned a lot too but given the casualties and equipment losses they've taken, especially around Kyiv just to give all that ground up will have a negative effect on morale, especially in the units that bleed out taking that ground. The replacement stocks of equipment seem to be sub-par, precision munitions don't seem all to prolific, and I can only see them really succeeding through superior firepower (ie Artillery). They'll still be stuck mostly to roads given the time of the year and weather. If they can gain local air superiority and provide effect close air support they may do well but with MANPADS having proved very effective we'll see if the Russian Air Force will risk itself that much for the sake of the Russian Army.

EDIT:
Also, with those larger numbers on a smaller front I wonder how the RU logistical system will be able to cope. Unless they're able to use railways they don't seem to be capable of providing good logistical and maintenance support via road networks to the present number of troops. A surge of troops may only further tax the logistical system and lead to even slower offensive progress after using up the initial supplies.
Also, was thinking, the mixing of units from other theaters to this one may have the effect of poisonous negative morale seeping into other units that may currently be on the up.

[Montmorency]

It's fucking insane, on the downslope of a failing invasion of conquest, to publish what almost amounts to a governmental memo, calling for the extermination of Ukrainian nationhood, intellegentsia, and armed resistance.

Are they trying to rouse their opposition to fanatical determination?

And people thought it was a gaffe when Biden coyly alluded to Putin's illegitimacy.

It is crazy though to see how people still seem in such denial that the Russian Army did this. They really think these are all staged massacres or 'false flag' operations to smear the Russian state.

Evolution of apology:
The west is lying, Russia won't invade.
Russia invaded but is winning.
Gerasimov Doctrine! They'll send in their good troops soon.
They'll take Kyiv any day.
They're slow because trying to save lives.
Nazis did Mariupol.
They never wanted Kyiv.
They're luring them to a cauldron. They meant to leave like that.
The footage is fake.
Ok it's real but it's being upplayed to manufacture consent.
Russia had no choice but to war crime.
Stop covering this! Why don't you cover something else?

[CrossLOPER]

I know, there's only a few items of warfare missing like surface naval battles, bayonet charges, cavalry charges, chemical warfare, and of course nuclear warfare.

I hate to make light of anything against the backdrop of depravity, but what I meant was more in-line with Russian soldiers fighting each other over food. As others mentioned, with the collapse of the northern front, it is hard to say what the condition is of the troops in the south and east. The supply and deployment problems are probably just as bad if not worse. Ukrainians will probably fight and rebel harder after hearing about the mass graves.

Ukraine has proven to be resilient and disciplined. I don't know how they will feel once they begin pushing back on the other fronts and potentially finding something worse.

My thoughts on whataboutism: I don't think the word "hypocrisy" should stop one from doing what is right, but I do think this would be a good time to reflect.

[Furunculus]

Also, with those larger numbers on a smaller front I wonder how the RU logistical system will be able to cope. Unless they're able to use railways they don't seem to be capable of providing good logistical and maintenance support via road networks to the present number of troops. A surge of troops may only further tax the logistical system and lead to even slower offensive progress after using up the initial supplies.
Also, was thinking, the mixing of units from other theaters to this one may have the effect of poisonous negative morale seeping into other

you have to imagine the ukranians have at least a few of the short range ballistic missiles they lobbed at the amphibious ships, and that one is queued in on the railway bridge the russians built to link crimea to the russian mainland...

[Tuuvi]

It's fucking insane, on the downslope of a failing invasion of conquest, to publish what almost amounts to a governmental memo, calling for the extermination of Ukrainian nationhood, intellegentsia, and armed resistance.

Are they trying to rouse their opposition to fanatical determination?

And people thought it was a gaffe when Biden coyly alluded to Putin's illegitimacy.

On the original website the article is dated March 4, just a couple of weeks after the invasion started. At any rate, what really stood out to me about the article was how similar Russia's justifications for the invasion are to Imperial Japan's justifications for invading China in the lead up to WWII.

Imperial Japan used Western racism and aggression against China as a justification for its own imperialism by presenting itself as a defender of Asia from Western colonialism and anti-asian racism. Of course, the Japanese were also racist themselves and believed that the Chinese were hopelessly backwards and needed to be colonized in order to save the Chinese from themselves, and they went on to massacre hundreds and thousands of Chinese people in the course of their invasion.

I see very similar arguments and dynamics being played out in the Russian article. It's true that the US is a chauvinistic, imperialist power, and Ukraine in recent years has lurched towards the far-right, passed laws to repress the Russian language, and integrated Nazi militias into its National Guard. The author of that article is taking those grievances and running with them, trying to present Russia as some sort of defender of underdeveloped nations against Western exploitation. He even uses the word "decolonization", a term usually employed by leftists and left-leaning academics.

However, as was the case with Imperial Japan, Russia's anti-imperialism isn't progressive, it's reactionary. The author even says that Russia needs to "realize itself as the last instance of protecting and preserving those values of historical Europe (the Old World) ". And much like Imperial Japan's attitude towards the Chinese, the Russian article is claiming that Ukrainians need to be invaded and have their culture destroyed in order to save them from themselves, because they've been manipulated by the West.