Great Power contentions

[rory_20_uk]

Even her fellow Tories have noted the volume of content on her Instagram, surmising that her reading of her office of foreign affairs is to use it as a platform to campaign for the office of prime minister, rather than to do the job that it's supposed to involve. I suppose it's hard to blame her, since her predecessor has shown how that can be done. Either way, she's not in the Ukraine to engage with the Russians, she's in the Ukraine to engage with the Tory members.

Such points were being made in Yes Prime Minister 50 years ago.

Interesting twist with the UK being suggested to head a european security council:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-ne...-new-security/

Assuming the head of the organisation has some (relatively speaking) military might it was either the UK or France. And France has the latest toy of head of the EU, Boris might like to have something new to posture on to help with headlines with his Base.

[Montmorency]

Con PM Tugendhat, surprisingly for his background, repeats the excellent point that the most effective way to resist Russia available to the West would be to crack down on internal and exported corruption.

More contentious is his estimation that "He’s trying to keep the pot simmering to keep the pressure on us and expose our divisions. He knows he could walk away now and lie about his great victory at home - the number of foreigners who have been to Moscow show he’s the main man - or he could see what else he can get."

I don't know, maybe, but it's hard for me to see what Putin can spin as a win if he cuts bait now. An American/EU promise to veto Ukrainian NATO/EU hopes in exchange for observable demobilization in the east (Crimea is a lost cause) is certainly a compromise that I hope our governments have sounded out for what it's worth. But if it were that simple wouldn't the deal have been finalized and publicized long ago? If he just returns troops home following the conclusion to the scheduled exercise with Belarus, what exactly does he tell the public in closing?

Related: Putin messaging openness to more diplomacy.

[Pannonian]

Con PM Tugendhat, surprisingly for his background, repeats the excellent point that the most effective way to resist Russia available to the West would be to crack down on internal and exported corruption.

More contentious is his estimation that "He’s trying to keep the pot simmering to keep the pressure on us and expose our divisions. He knows he could walk away now and lie about his great victory at home - the number of foreigners who have been to Moscow show he’s the main man - or he could see what else he can get."

I don't know, maybe, but it's hard for me to see what Putin can spin as a win if he cuts bait now. An American/EU promise to veto Ukrainian NATO/EU hopes in exchange for observable demobilization in the east (Crimea is a lost cause) is certainly a compromise that I hope our governments have sounded out for what it's worth. But if it were that simple wouldn't the deal have been finalized and publicized long ago? If he just returns troops home following the conclusion to the scheduled exercise with Belarus, what exactly does he tell the public in closing?

Related: Putin messaging openness to more diplomacy.

Aaron Banks, one of the biggest backers of the Brexit campaign, was a bankrupt. Yet he was able to back the Leave campaign with umpteen million pounds. Entirely unrelated to this, of course, was the fact that he has close associates who made their money in Russia, dealing with Putin and oligarchs. We know this is unrelated because Banks has launched various lawsuits against anyone who's had the audacity to suggest that the Russian were backing Brexit via Banks. AFAIK he's not actually won any of these lawsuits, and the last hearing he was due to attend, he didn't attend.

Something that we wouldn't have seen during the Cold War, is the Russians friends our PM, one of the leading figures of Brexit, has, including the owner of one of the capital's main newspapers. Nor would we have seen our now PM take time out from his political career to play a game of tennis with the wife of one of Putin's friends. That got him over 150k I think, which was quite lucrative for one tennis match. Dash the thought that the money wasn't for the tennis match, but for talks on political favours accompanying the meeting.

Also see the Russia Report, the UK security committee's investigation of the Brexit campaign, which said that the UK government did not find any Russian interference because it refused to look for it.

Brexit has been one of Russia's most cost-effective political campaigns ever, in how much damage it has done to one of its major competitors, at a trifling cost. Most of the work was done by the natives themselves, with just a few operatives needing payment.

[Furunculus]

all this dirty money doesn't seem to have had much affect in weakening UK push-back against Russian aggression?
to the extent this can be judged it is relative to our european neighbours, and they look much more wobbly-knee'd that than the UK (with the honorable exceptions of the eastern baltic states).

i love the idea that russia bought brexit. makes me want to invest in tinfoil futures.

----------------------

separately - the always excellent lindley-french:
https://lindleyfrench.blogspot.com/2...of-munich.html

[rory_20_uk]

all this dirty money doesn't seem to have had much affect in weakening UK push-back against Russian aggression?
to the extent this can be judged it is relative to our european neighbours, and they look much more wobbly-knee'd that than the UK (with the honorable exceptions of the eastern baltic states).

i love the idea that russia bought brexit. makes me want to invest in tinfoil futures.

----------------------

separately - the always excellent lindley-french:
https://lindleyfrench.blogspot.com/2...of-munich.html

A threat of cutting off money before anything has happened would not only mean there's no threat, but also would tell the rest of the world the UK could do this again when not happy. If Russia had attacked and the UK had impounded / suspended / taken the money then at least there would have been some causus belli - like what the USA did to Germany in WW1.

Our "push back" was some words, withdrawing troops last weekend and the only thing NATO has unanimously said is that there will be no help for non-NATO members.

Compared to Germany almost soiling its britches and France sucking up then yeah - the UK is leading the field in European in pseudo-action.

[Furunculus]

UK input was 2000 Anti Tank Guided missiles and a trilateral agreement with Poland and Ukraine.

Germany provided 5000 helmets, and prevented Lithuania transferring some military-aid artillery pieces on to Ukraine.

[Pannonian]

all this dirty money doesn't seem to have had much affect in weakening UK push-back against Russian aggression?
to the extent this can be judged it is relative to our european neighbours, and they look much more wobbly-knee'd that than the UK (with the honorable exceptions of the eastern baltic states).

i love the idea that russia bought brexit. makes me want to invest in tinfoil futures.

----------------------

separately - the always excellent lindley-french:
https://lindleyfrench.blogspot.com/2...of-munich.html

Does it mean it's ok for our politicians to take Russian money then? Corbyn got flak for taking the Russians' side over Salisbury, deservedly. Why does the other side taking hostile money get excuses made for them?

Personally, I'm suspicious of influence from various countries in whom I have little faith that they have good intentions for the UK. Russia and China prime amongst them.

[Pannonian]

A threat of cutting off money before anything has happened would not only mean there's no threat, but also would tell the rest of the world the UK could do this again when not happy. If Russia had attacked and the UK had impounded / suspended / taken the money then at least there would have been some causus belli - like what the USA did to Germany in WW1.

Our "push back" was some words, withdrawing troops last weekend and the only thing NATO has unanimously said is that there will be no help for non-NATO members.

Compared to Germany almost soiling its britches and France sucking up then yeah - the UK is leading the field in European in pseudo-action.

We should investigate Russian influence in our politics, and publicise how individuals in government have Russian links. Supposed military action is open and can be easily verified. I want as little Russian influence in our politics as possible. If we are to admit them as a legit influence, they should at least be in the open.

[rory_20_uk]

We should investigate Russian influence in our politics, and publicise how individuals in government have Russian links. Supposed military action is open and can be easily verified. I want as little Russian influence in our politics as possible. If we are to admit them as a legit influence, they should at least be in the open.

That MPs in general and lobbying in particular requires oversight by either MI5 or Special Branch is beyond question.

The issue is broader than just Russians buying influence.

[Furunculus]

Does it mean it's ok for our politicians to take Russian money then? Corbyn got flak for taking the Russians' side over Salisbury, deservedly. Why does the other side taking hostile money get excuses made for them?

At no point did i suggest it was.
Your premise is that UK is bought and paid for by the Russian state, my response is that there is no sign that Russia is getting any foriegn policy input for that money.
And this is the difference here; Corbyn (then) Germany (today) seem to be taking the wrong side, but there is no evidence that is true of the UK today.

Personally, I'm suspicious of influence from various countries in whom I have little faith that they have good intentions for the UK. Russia and China prime amongst them.

I agree.

[Pannonian]

That MPs in general and lobbying in particular requires oversight by either MI5 or Special Branch is beyond question.

The issue is broader than just Russians buying influence.

I'm ok with that. The problem, the Commons committee (I think it's Commons) found, is that the security services have been actively looking away from investigating them. And more recently we see that the Met had been overlooking lawbreaking in Downing Street until public opinion (and I suspect timing) made it expedient to investigate. The people who are supposed to enforce the rules and protect the country have been looking aside to allow the government free rein. And most of the right media have been aiding this by spinning explanations and excuses for them.

Something that we can start with in this current Parliament is requiring ministers, including the PM, to answer the questions being asked, and imposing substantial sanctions against anyone found to have misled the House. Maybe the Chief Liar will have to man up or get out then.

[Furunculus]

UK input was 2000 Anti Tank Guided missiles and a trilateral agreement with Poland and Ukraine.

Germany provided 5000 helmets, and prevented Lithuania transferring some military-aid artillery pieces on to Ukraine.

that trilateral gets official today:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/j...-february-2022

What it looks like:

https://twitter.com/ConGeostrategy/s...36288027070472

[Montmorency]

Genocide and all sorts of 2014-throwback propaganda.

Hm, seems any Russian diplomatic/de-escalation feint has now concluded and we're in the casus bellus stage. If he has indeed just been drawing this dialogue out under false pretenses, does Putin seriously not realize that he's only pissing off the third parties even more? If he invades, he'll probably receive stiffer resistance and a harsher EU/US penalty than he would have if he had arranged a blitz offensive at the end of last year.

The US government's information war spoiler strategy has been interesting.

Reminder that this live map exists.

February 19 will be the 79th anniversary of von Manstein's armored counterattack toward Kharkov, in NE Ukraine.

Some of many articles and bits of information:

[spmetla]

Genocide and all sorts of 2014-throwback propaganda.

Hm, seems any Russian diplomatic/de-escalation feint has now concluded and we're in the casus bellus stage. If he has indeed just been drawing this dialogue out under false pretenses, does Putin seriously not realize that he's only pissing off the third parties even more? If he invades, he'll probably receive stiffer resistance and a harsher EU/US penalty than he would have if he had arranged a blitz offensive at the end of last year.

The US government's information war spoiler strategy has been interesting.

Reminder that this live map exists.

February 19 will be the 79th anniversary of von Manstein's armored counterattack toward Kharkov, in NE Ukraine.

Some of many articles and bits of information:

Yup, having been following what TASS has been putting out the last few days there is certainly the effort to make it look like the Ukraine is just being unfair to the separatists and unwilling to talk about Minsk 2 negotiations or abide by Minsk 1.

Also that pontoon bridge is quite the development if true. Guess a radiological fallout zone is a weaknesss in defense as who would you station there if you were the Ukraine.
https://tass.com/politics/1405525

The plan for a peace settlement in Donbass relies on the Minsk agreements, achieved in February 2015. Among other things they envisage ceasefire, pullback of weapons, amnesty, resumption of economic relations and a flexible constitutional reform in Ukraine. The authorities in Kiev have repeatedly professed their readiness to act on these agreements, but in fact have ignored them for many years. In particular, Kiev refuses to have a direct dialogue with Donetsk and Lugansk and objects to granting Donbass a special status. Also, it procrastinates on the negotiations in the Contact Group.

The USG's spoiler strategy is interesting for sure. Was talking with a friend this week about how our declaring that Wednesday would be the invasion was almost a sure way to delay it as there's no way the Russians would want to make it look like Western intelligence was right even if the info was correct down to the minute of the attack. Also, there's the factor that a crying wolf effect might happen if the Russians drag out the threat leading to NATO/EU disunity and then renewed opportunity for an attack.
My buddy also thinks that part of getting overt Chinese support was likely a promise to not completely distract from their Winter Games events and hold off until afterward.

I'm actually pleased to see the aggressive information campaign as I think too often in the past the US and NATO have just assumed that they were so in the 'right' that there was no need to push information to dominate the airwaves and discussion.

[Hooahguy]

The USG's spoiler strategy is interesting for sure. Was talking with a friend this week about how our declaring that Wednesday would be the invasion was almost a sure way to delay it as there's no way the Russians would want to make it look like Western intelligence was right even if the info was correct down to the minute of the attack. Also, there's the factor that a crying wolf effect might happen if the Russians drag out the threat leading to NATO/EU disunity and then renewed opportunity for an attack.
My buddy also thinks that part of getting overt Chinese support was likely a promise to not completely distract from their Winter Games events and hold off until afterward.

I'm actually pleased to see the aggressive information campaign as I think too often in the past the US and NATO have just assumed that they were so in the 'right' that there was no need to push information to dominate the airwaves and discussion.

Yup, I think the policy of pushing out tons of information has worked fairly well and kept the narrative in the West's court, with Russia trying to reclaim the narrative a couple times with feigned withdrawal stories over the past week (which has largely failed). My thinking is that there was solid intel that the 16th would be the day of invasion, but when the word got out the Russians changed their plans to not give western intel credibility, as you said. But with today's evacuations, bombings, and artillery bombardments, I think we are on the brink of invasion. I would be shocked if Russia doesnt do anything by the 20th.

[Montmorency]

Cool article on some of the technology behind contemporary OSINT. And we've all been seeing those commercial satellite ~1km snapshots of military formations from Maxar and the like, so clear and crisp. The great powers must enjoy the sensitivity to capture such resolutions down to a few meters.


I noticed this older social media clip of Russian movements, featuring some armor. I'm unsure whether the music was added over the clip in editing, or if it was a diegetic soundtrack from the car's sound system. Either way, I refuse to believe that it was playing by coincidence. The song is a rock cover of the famous Soviet march, "Three Tankmen."

On the border the clouds go gloomy
On the frontier a harsh silence is embraced
On the high banks of the Amur River
The motherland's guard stands.

There, a solid barrier has been set up for the enemy
There it stands, brave and strong
At the borders of the Far East:
The armored strike battalion.

They live there - and the song is the guarantee -
An indestructible, strong family
Three tankers - three cheerful friends
The crew of a combat vehicle.

Thick dew fell on the grass
Fogs fell upon the taiga
That night the samurai decided to
Cross the border by the river.

But the reconnaissance reported accurately
And it went, swept by the command
In the native land of the Far East:
The armored strike battalion.

The tanks dashed, raising the wind
Formidable armor advanced
And the samurai flew to the ground
Under the force of steel and fire

And it finished off - the song is the guarantee -
All enemies in the fiery attack
Three tankmen - three cheerful friends
The crew of the combat vehicle!

Damn Russian trolls.

[spmetla]

China Seeks to Protect Ties With the U.S
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...edgdhp&pc=U531

Behind the Beijing-Moscow joint stance against NATO enlargement is Mr. Xi’s eagerness to show solidarity with Mr. Putin as both countries’ ties with the U.S. have soured, according to people with knowledge of Beijing’s thinking. Just as Russia is worried about threats to its security from any NATO expansion, one of the people said, China is concerned about “its territorial integrity as a result of the U.S. meddling in Taiwan.”

“They feel like they’re in the same boat,” the person added. Beijing sees Taiwan as Chinese territory and bringing the self-governing island into its fold as part of Mr. Xi’s “China Dream” of national revival.

However, China’s leadership appeared to have underestimated the reaction to the Feb. 4 statement from the rest of the world.

Many in Washington and Brussels saw the entente as one of the clearest signals yet that Beijing intends to join forces with Moscow to reshape the global order closer to their two countries’ authoritarian vision. That, on top of Beijing’s coercive behavior toward countries from Australia to Lithuania and increased military activities near the Taiwan Strait, has offered more support for President Biden’s effort to work with allies to guard against China.
While tilting closer to Moscow, the Chinese leadership still sees it in its interest not to have the bottom fallout of its ties with the U.S. It needs continued access to American financial and technological resources to ensure economic security and development—an access that could be jeopardized should Beijing decide to help Moscow evade sanctions in the event of an invasion.

“China recognizes its relationship with the U.S. is contentious and competitive,” said Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia program at the German Marshall Fund, a Washington-based think tank. “But they don’t want to be pushed into the Russian camp.”

It would be interesting to see how China can walk the line between Russia and the US/EU economic benefits. I think it was hoping that the US/NATO and EU would prove to have more disunity in response to Russia's build up. A more united 'West' that acts as a bloc makes it much more difficult for the PRC to play off individual countries against each other as its overreaction to a Taiwan embassy in Lithuania has proved in regard to EU relations.

Getting the EU nations, especially Germany, to consider not having access to Russian gas yet remain committed in their opposition to Russia is undoubtedly recalibrating the PRC's measure of 'Western' resolve versus the easy out of maintaining economic ties and only enacting symbolic sanctions.

There's also the side that the PRC, like the rest of the gas importing world does not want to see fuel prices go up suddenly given the fragile economic climate worldwide.


EDIT:
Putin confirms he will recognise breakaway Ukraine regions
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60454795

Putin has finished speaking now, and after a long address, in which he said Ukraine had no history of being a true nation, and accused - without evidence - the Ukrainian authorities of corruption, he confirmed he would recognise the independence of two breakaway regions

He's signed the documents and asked the Russian parliament to ratify the decision as soon as possible.

He finished his speech by saying “I’m sure I’ll have the support of the Russian people. Thank you.”

I guess it goes up a notch, only annexation await at some point in the future for these two regions.

So what's the next step? Say that Kiev is attacking sovereign nations under Russia's protection and that a security corridor must be established?

[Shaka_Khan]

[rory_20_uk]

Russia recognises as a country people clamouring for assistance and provides assistance and installs a pliant leader.

USA: "Oi! That's OUR thing!"

A massive part of East Ukraine the people mainly speak Russian, are pro-Russian and in many cases want to be part of Russia.

Now, in the Good Old Days this issue would have been solved by deporting everyone which isn't happy or is ethnically different out of the country, such as in newly formed Poland or Kalingrad.

But back on topic, Russia manages to up the ante just a bit more by taking two areas of nigh on worthless land leading to widespread condemnation, demands for withdrawal and promises that no troops will be sent.

[spmetla]

A massive part of East Ukraine the people mainly speak Russian, are pro-Russian and in many cases want to be part of Russia.

Now, in the Good Old Days this issue would have been solved by deporting everyone which isn't happy or is ethnically different out of the country, such as in newly formed Poland or Kalingrad.

I understand and if this was done peacefully would be on board with their going independent and eventually annexed by Russia.

I know the current world order really has no good mechanism for enabling provinces/towns/regions to declare independence and get annexed by other countries as the current nation they are in usually don't want that to happen. Looking at the former Yugoslav states, present day Ethiopia/Tigray, Sudan>South Sudan, Catalonia, South Tirol, Taiwan, and the dozen 'frozen conflict' quasi states of the former Soviet Union.

However, allowing a country to redraw the map by force and take away their neighbor's territory is not really acceptable. The creation of Kosovo is really the only example in recent history of the US doing that and that was more in response to the Serbian actions against the Kosovars/Albanians.

The population exchanges sadly do work, no problem with the Sudetendeutsch after Benes understandably kicked them all out of Czechoslovakia after WW2. The Greeks and Turks were far more peaceful after the 1920s population exchange.

But back on topic, Russia manages to up the ante just a bit more by taking two areas of nigh on worthless land leading to widespread condemnation, demands for withdrawal and promises that no troops will be sent.

The land is certainly not worthless and actually was a very valuable part of the Ukraine in mining exploitation. The major problem of course is that the newly independent 'republics' don't control the whole of their own 'countries' and will likely need Russian 'peacekeepers' help to 'secure their borders.'

[Hooahguy]

A massive part of East Ukraine the people mainly speak Russian, are pro-Russian and in many cases want to be part of Russia.

This just in, France invades Belgium and seizes Wallonia.

[Montmorency]

I've seen even more vaguely-trollish Tiktoks of Russian mobilization, including but this one is just inexplicable.
https://twitter.com/YWNReporter/stat...87284177264652 [VIDEO]

The gist of it is, a (seeming) radio announcement plays as the driver rolls alongside a convoy, with the speaker criticizing Ukraine

Let me ask, you want to start a war with the Russians? Are you out of your mind? Do you know whom you're dealing with? Russians liberated you from the fascists at the cost of 20 million of their own lives? And you want to make war against them? What ill did they ever do against you? What are you talking about?

then increasingly-epic music plays as trucks roll into the twilight. I have even less idea of what's going on anymore (in the Midwestern sense).


Senator Chris Murphy has a clear explainer on why he believes Putin is operating from a position of weakness.


On the new fronts of information warfare, in response ot the US embassy's anti-Russian memeing:

Have a friend at a US consulate, they have a person who's job is just to monitor the Twitter of the RU consulate and get approval to counter-meme anything they post. Brave new world haha

Finally, Trump continues to be a total freak:

Well, what went wrong was a rigged election and what went wrong is a candidate that shouldn’t be there and a man that has no concept of what he’s doing. I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, “This is genius.” Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine. Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful.

So Putin is now saying, “It’s independent,” a large section of Ukraine. I said, “How smart is that?” And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That’s strongest peace force… We could use that on our southern border. That’s the strongest peace force I’ve ever seen. There were more army tanks than I’ve ever seen. They’re gonna keep peace all right. No, but think of it. Here’s a guy who’s very savvy… I know him very well. Very, very well. [Ed. rofl]

By the way, this never would have happened with us. Had I been in office, not even thinkable. This would never have happened. But here’s a guy that says, you know, “I’m gonna declare a big portion of Ukraine independent,” he used the word “independent,” “and we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.” You gotta say that’s pretty savvy. And you know the response was from Biden? There was no response. They didn’t have one for that. No, it’s very sad. Very sad.

Russia recognises as a country people clamouring for assistance and provides assistance and installs a pliant leader.

USA: "Oi! That's OUR thing!"

Russia's been at it a lot longer than we've been around. So has England. An American-centric lens doesn't make sense in a conflict where medieval settlement patterns are invoked.

A massive part of East Ukraine the people mainly speak Russian,

It should be foregrounded in any discussion of the conflict that almost everyone in Ukraine speaks Russian. Next, Joe Biden to liberate Ireland's English speakers from Celtic oppression and genocide? That one's slightly more plausible.

Indeed, as with much of his rhetoric, Putin has been incoherent on this point. The Ukrainians turn up variously as antagonists of Russian folk, or as wayward, brainwashed Little Russians with no distinct identity or legitimacy themselves. Are Ukrainians a subset of Russians who deserve to be ruled by the Czar of All Russians, or are they predatory fascist Russophobes?

are pro-Russian and in many cases want to be part of Russia.

Still gotta sift through the particulars of this, to be fair, lesser-known conflict without falling afoul of propaganda. This just isn't true, though a plurality probably don't have any strong preference of suzerain as long as they can get on with their lives (as has been the case for most of human history).

The land is certainly not worthless and actually was a very valuable part of the Ukraine in mining exploitation. The major problem of course is that the newly independent 'republics' don't control the whole of their own 'countries' and will likely need Russian 'peacekeepers' help to 'secure their borders.'

I'd never heard of mining, but that it was a site of heavy industry which the Russians subsequently dismantled and looted.

I know the current world order really has no good mechanism for enabling provinces/towns/regions to declare independence and get annexed by other countries as the current nation they are in usually don't want that to happen. Looking at the former Yugoslav states, present day Ethiopia/Tigray, Sudan>South Sudan, Catalonia, South Tirol, Taiwan, and the dozen 'frozen conflict' quasi states of the former Soviet Union.

There's no good mechanism because it's usually a matter of force as to the allocation of resources. When one faction or ethnic community can't get what it wants or needs by political means, the other options are separation or armed conflict to seize the state apparatus. So you have the situations in Myanmar and Ethiopia (though Ethiopia's civil war has been started by its former ruling class). And it's a whole other level of conflict when an external power foments and fabricates unrest,

So there is no such thing as a peaceful resolution mechanism without a preexisting mutual consensus on separation or reform.




Does anyone have any context for this video? It's purported to be national broadcast from the end of 2021 showing the leader of the Russian Liberal Democratic Party declaring that

At 4am on 22 Feb you'll feel [our new policy]. I'd like 2022 to be peaceful. But I love the truth, for 75 years I've said the truth. It won't be peaceful. It will be a year when Russia once again becomes great.

That's pretty ominous, and prescient. How does it reflect on recent events? Was it all preplanned? Did Zhirik let something slip improperly? Is or was the declaration part of Russian information strategy?

[Furunculus]

I'm in poland and acts like this - threatening to sue if Poland builds nuclear power plants - as well as Nordstream generally are going down like a bucket of sick:

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/statu...92433113907200

adding to that the (lack of) support for Ukraine with acts such as blocking the lithuanian(?) artillery and a meagre 5k helmets in military aid is making Germany look like a very undependable ally.

[Pannonian]

EU imposes sanctions on all members of Russian Duma and other influential individuals. UK imposes sanctions on 5 Russian banks and 3 oligarchs. No sanctions on anyone who has donated to Tory party during Boris Johnson's time as PM. I guess those banks and oligarchs must be punished for forgetting to top up the party coffers.

[rory_20_uk]

EU imposes sanctions on all members of Russian Duma and other influential individuals. UK imposes sanctions on 5 Russian banks and 3 oligarchs. No sanctions on anyone who has donated to Tory party during Boris Johnson's time as PM. I guess those banks and oligarchs must be punished for forgetting to top up the party coffers.

In neither case will it make a jot of difference.

[Pannonian]

In neither case will it make a jot of difference.

If so, why aren't the Tory government doing more?

[Shaka_Khan]

China isn't imposing economic sanctions on Russia.

[rory_20_uk]

If so, why aren't the Tory government doing more?

Because we are a small island the other side of Europe - a modern day phrase would be "We've not got the ships, we've not got the men, and not got the money too"... Pax Britannia is long since dead. And the last time we got involved in a war in that neck of the woods (the Crimea) it went horribly wrong.

A united Europe would struggle to project strength there. And Europe - be that NATO / EU or whatever - isn't. No country in Europe has forces with the reach, nor the logistical chain to back up anything like a near-peer war. Few, if any, in Western Europe have the will to do so.

Europe can stop buying their fuel. But European voters care a lot more about fuel bills than the Ukraine. Ironically, the UK doesn't purchase much Russian gas so we don't even have that lever to pull; I read an article that the UK could help the EU with LNG imports (since we have excess terminals and Europe doesn't have enough to compensate for the loss of Russia) but LNG is more expensive. We've stopped selling Russian debt - leaving only ten or so other places to sell it.

One of the few upsides in not mattering as a country is being able to kick back, look at big geopolitical issues and go "oh dear - someone really ought to do something about that..."

[Pannonian]

Because we are a small island the other side of Europe - a modern day phrase would be "We've not got the ships, we've not got the men, and not got the money too"... Pax Britannia is long since dead. And the last time we got involved in a war in that neck of the woods (the Crimea) it went horribly wrong.

A united Europe would struggle to project strength there. And Europe - be that NATO / EU or whatever - isn't. No country in Europe has forces with the reach, nor the logistical chain to back up anything like a near-peer war. Few, if any, in Western Europe have the will to do so.

Europe can stop buying their fuel. But European voters care a lot more about fuel bills than the Ukraine. Ironically, the UK doesn't purchase much Russian gas so we don't even have that lever to pull; I read an article that the UK could help the EU with LNG imports (since we have excess terminals and Europe doesn't have enough to compensate for the loss of Russia) but LNG is more expensive. We've stopped selling Russian debt - leaving only ten or so other places to sell it.

One of the few upsides in not mattering as a country is being able to kick back, look at big geopolitical issues and go "oh dear - someone really ought to do something about that..."

I'm not talking about sending ships, planes, or boots on the ground. I'm talking about sanctions against Russian money. It's entirely within our power to do so. But despite all the noise about us being hardline against Russian aggression, we're doing less about Russian money than the EU are. None of those who've donated to the Tory party during Johnson's reign have any action taken against them, and precious few besides. What's the explanation for doing less than the EU on this matter?

[rory_20_uk]

I'm not talking about sending ships, planes, or boots on the ground. I'm talking about sanctions against Russian money. It's entirely within our power to do so. But despite all the noise about us being hardline against Russian aggression, we're doing less about Russian money than the EU are. None of those who've donated to the Tory party during Johnson's reign have any action taken against them, and precious few besides. What's the explanation for doing less than the EU on this matter?

I hope you're not expecting me to defend Boris.

What I did say is that neither the EU nor the UK sanctions will do anything. Not buying Russian gas probably would eventually - but I don't see the EU jumping on that one. If the USA blocks Russia from the international banking system that would probably at the very least cause a massive inconvenience.