Great Power contentions

[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.

[Crandar]

A good analysis in English on the military situation. He's openly pro-Ukrainian, but he consults both sources and, in my opinion, largely succeeds in distinguishing facts from his emotions, unlike most pundits and amateurs:

Kiev and Chernihiv Front

After weeks of stalling, I think it's obvious that Russia has failed to resolve the logistical issues around both of these areas. The situation was effectively a stalemate for three to four weeks, with both sides unable to make significant progress. The decision could made itself, and Russia executed a full withdrawal from both Kiev and Chernihiv, and seemingly, most of Sumy as well. Now whereas the Institute of War is calling the retreat "disorderly", something I really struggle with getting my head around, I will simply call it an organized retreat that was well executed. There do not seem to be any significant casualties as a result of this maneuver.

Nevertheless, the bottom line is that the Russian Army has failed to meet any major objectives here and Ukraine achieved a significant strategic victory. The fierce resistance put up by Ukraine has forced Russia to completely re-orient it's operational goals, and likely, it's long-term strategic goals.

Donbass Front

Since the war begun, the Russian Army has achieved significant progress from both the Donbass and the Southern Axis of assault. Russian forces have claimed most of Luhansk Oblast, they've entrenched themselves in parts of and around Kharkiv, they are in position to strike Zaporozhia and completely encircle the JFO. You can spin this how you want, Ukraine has fought for every mile and they've had to give up considerably more territory here than anywhere around Kiev.

The logistics in this area are much better, and the terrain readily lends itself to Russia's typical emphasis on artillery and armor. Russia has been steadily winning the attrition war on this front and the progress speaks for itself.

Currently, the most dangerous axis of advance is Izyum. Just today I've seen a destroyed column at Barvinenkovo. In a sense, it's good, the Russian probing attack sent here has clearly suffered a catastrophic defeat. However, the Russian advance this far South is not a good sign for the overall operational picture.


Even a siege of Barvinenkovo, essentially blockades the last major roadway in and out of Slavyansk. This sets up Russian forces well for either a complete encirclement of Ukranian positions in the JFO, or a powerful offensive on the entire front. Concurrently, there is a low-intensity offensive towards Pokrovsk, which is a major highway hub.

With the total withdrawal of Russian forces from the Northern Front, it is likely that these units, along with fresh units generated from other parts of the country, are going to be deployed to this front. Russia is hungry for a decisive victory that cannot be denied by Western media.

Much has been said about manpower shortages, I believe I've also mentioned it once or twice. Russia is trying to avoid switching to a war-time footing. Effectively, it cannot generate any more troops without some sort of mobilization. The hastily constructed BARS system, may generate a few more Battalions at most, but I doubt it. Not to mention, the losses of enormous amounts of equipment... and this offensive needs to either succeed, or suffer very few losses.

To be fair, the Russian Army has been operating significantly better. The rate of losses, as I mentioned many times now, is significantly more sustainable than the opening few days of war.

Southern/Kherson Front

Look, I realize many Western media outlets tend to... gloss over this area, to put it nicely. I mean you can Ctrl+F Kherson for yourselves here. Now the truth is, Ukraine has been announcing offensives and counter-offensives in this area for the last two weeks, likely emboldened by the successful counter attack in this area two-three weeks ago. Sorry to say, but the fact that Ukranians aren't saying much in terms of whether these offensives succeeded or failed, speaks for itself. I've seen enough footage to conclude that Ukraine's constant probing attacks have been miserably failing and they've been needlessly losing armor and artillery in this AO.

I've heard on podcasts and from analysts that a lot of Ukrainian forces are working on ad-hoc command structure where local governors have some degree of control over the armed forces in their area. This explains why the Mayor of Mykolaiv has been such a... fascinating source of information. If these claims are true, than the Mayor or Governor of Mykolaiv or whatever, is single-handedly responsible for losing a lot of Ukrainian lives and armor rather pointlessly. It's clear that Russia is not planning any major operations on this axis, so he needs to stop wasting precious resources trying to retake Kherson. It is a fool's errand. This is not Kiev, where you can fight block by block.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is the battlespace between Kherson and Mykolaiv. Lots of woods, lots of open areas, small, sporadic, populated centers that make defense, artillery recon-fire, and Russia's general strengths, all the more emphasized. Counter-attacking along this position has been rather fruitless.

So if you're wondering why this AO has been so "glossed over" by Western media and analysts relative to other areas, well this is a minor reason why. Only failure to report. The main reason, is obviously that the stakes and size of forces involved, is a lot smaller.


Notable Incidents

I think we need to mention the successful attack on Belgorod and the sinking of a Russian ship in Berdyansk.

These are notable successes by Ukranians where they identified holes in Russian PVO coverage. Well done.


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

State of Ukrainian Military

Look, there's a reason why they're asking for more aid now, especially armor. I think that Ukraine's units have been suffering terrible casualties. These constant counter-offensives cannot be cheap, especially since Ukraine does not have as much armor and artillery availability as Russia does. Especially their Territorial Defense units, which is essentially lightly armed militia. The more important question is of course how many "professional" troops they have left, because these are probably the only troops that can carry out real offensives to retake territory.

Now I am obviously of the mind that Ukraine simply doesn't need to attack to win. They just need to defend really well. However, it's obvious to me that the Ukrainian command disagrees with myself and other analysts and has other ideas. They are intent on retaking their country back. I think it is a very real possibility that Ukraine may run out of their best troops, well before Russia runs its own clock out, if it even has one. For all the doom and gloom, Russians may welcome a mobilization and a total war, and I wouldn't be making assumptions about war weariness or troop attrition. Too many unknown variables at this point.

[CrossLOPER]

My only guess is that they are trying to keep up with the momentum. That, and perhaps the remainder of the Russian force is in even worse shape than people think.

[Montmorency]

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.

Russia uses the day-month-year dating convention along with the rest of Europe. 3/4 means April 3rd.

Ukraine in recent years has lurched towards the far-right, passed laws to repress the Russian language

But it should be noted that this isn't remotely the case. It's a pernicious Russian libel and one that really ought to be cleared up now that the region has drawn our special attention.

A good analysis in English on the military situation. He's openly pro-Ukrainian, but he consults both sources and, in my opinion, largely succeeds in distinguishing facts from his emotions, unlike most pundits and amateurs:

Do you have a link to the source? The only adjustment I would currently make is that ISW only assessed that the retreat was "disorderly enough" in implementation to abandon some personnel - not in the capacity of a screening force by implication. They also commented on orderly aspects. But that's tactics. A reason the decision for total withdrawal was a questionable one operationally, as I might have mentioned, is that it also inevitably meant abandoning large quantities of equipment that could not be successfully transported on short notice, or would break down during the movement, in the context of Russian aims to consolidate their combat power. As the quotation mentions, the Ukrainians have limited counterattack potential, so leaving a large rearguard to invite the Ukrainians to grind across forest and suburb would have been a better outcome for Russia.

On the new consolidated front, an obvious aspiration from the defenders' perspective would be to conduct deep operations into the enemy rear (behind the Donets River out from Kharkiv) while the enemy has a large concentration across the river in Donets Oblast (forward of Izyum). There is also the political imperative to hold strategic territory in Donetsk. And it is strategic territory, since besides the politically-unacceptable scenario of Putin just digging in for permanent occupation once the oblast borders are secured, an occupation Ukraine would never be able to dislodge, the densely-urbanized province (with more forest cover than nearby areas and a northern border to a good river barrier in the Donetsk) hinges all defenses east of the Dnieper, up to Kharkiv. Beyond Slovyansk is a lot of rural steppe. Whether in this war or a future one, losing all of Donetsk would force Ukraine to defend back from the river itself, losing many towns by default, grievously weakening Kharkiv's flank, and exposing the major Dnieper cities (Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Kremenchuk) to a direct siege and destruction that they have so far avoided. So both sides are bound to follow a certain strategic logic in the next phase that could leave either of them more vulnerable and less flexible.

Adaptation is a certainty for any side in war, eventually, but so far betting on the Russians here has been shown up for folly every time.

[Crandar]

@Montmorency

I'll send you the link shorty.

In other news, Zhelensky made his speech today in the Greek parliament and he completely screwed up. The speech itself was kinda meh, just a few banal references to Greek history and the relationship with Ukraine, but that's alright. However, just in the middle, he let two Ukrainian fighters join him. One of whom confirmed that he was a volunteer in the Azov battalion. Obviously that caused quite a controversy (while also violating the Greek parliament's rules) and the government's representative thanked Zhelensky for his intervention, but criticised him for the Azov part. Comically enough, the prime-minister of Greece had previously released an (obviously pre-recorded announcement) wholeheartedly congratulating Zhelensky on his "flawless" speech.

Quite an amateurish move. Firstly, it soured the relations of the two governments, because Zhelensky going off-script put the prime-minister in an embarrassing position. Secondly and more importantly, bringing forward an Azov battalion volunteer fit straight into the Russian narrative of right-wing extremists controlling Ukraine.

[Furunculus]

[MENTION=74339]One of whom confirmed that he was a volunteer in the Azov battalion. Obviously that caused quite a controversy (while also violating the Greek parliament's rules) and the government's representative thanked Zhelensky for his intervention, but criticised him for the Azov part.

Why does everyone get their knickers in a twist about the azov battalion?

a) it has very few nazi's in it these days , and nothing to say our witness was one - always a minority, now a very small minority.
b) it has been front and centre in the defence/devestation of Mauripol - and would provide useful witnesses from the frontline.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-60525350

[spmetla]

Why does everyone get their knickers in a twist about the azov battalion?

a) it has very few nazi's in it these days , and nothing to say our witness was one - always a minority, now a very small minority.
b) it has been front and centre in the defence/devestation of Mauripol - and would provide useful witnesses from the frontline.

Because it's been in the front and center of right-wing pro-Russian media as proof that the UKR govt are all nazis or neo-nazi leaning. Their imagine versus their reality is a bit out of whack. Sorta like a handfuls of 'professional anarchists' allowing all BLM protests to be portrayed as threats to the US Govt.

Czech Republic sends tanks, infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ts-2022-04-05/

PRAGUE, April 5 (Reuters) - The Czech Republic has sent T-72 tanks and BVP-1 infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine, a Czech defence source told Reuters on Tuesday, confirming a local media report.

Public broadcaster Czech Television initially reported the shipment, showing footage on Twitter of a train loaded with five tanks and five fighting vehicles. It said the shipment was a gift agreed with NATO allies.

This is exactly why I'm still irritated that MiG-29s aren't being transferred over, the hardware has gone from man portable weapons to legacy MBTs and IFVs. Manned aircraft are not an escalation, especially as it's to help a country's fight for territorial integrity, not expansion.

S Senate votes to resurrect World War II-era policy to help Ukraine amid Russian invasion
The original lend-lease program enabled the U.S. to send weapons to the Allies in World War II
https://www.foxnews.com/world/us-sen...ssian-invasion

The U.S. Senate voted to resurrect the lend-lease program that enabled America to send weapons to Britain and other allies in World War II, in order to bolster Ukraine's effort against the Russian invaders.

The Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022, S.3522, passed the Senate by voice vote late Wednesday. The bill aims "to provide enhanced authority for the President to enter into agreements with the Government of Ukraine to lend or lease defense articles to that Government to protect civilian populations in Ukraine from Russian military invasion."

I hope this means that the US will start to lend/gift/sell some more substantial systems to the Ukraine. Start training their pilots on F-16s, Abrams tanks, land/air launched harpoon missiles, Patriot ADA systems or whatever. If the US does believe that the combat will go on for years more then lets help Ukraine adopt and build up a years long out defense posture. Now that the battle of Kyiv is won and the Ukrainian govt looks safe there's no reason to not invest substantially in their self-defense.

I also hope that the US and EU are already trying to get funding to rebuild key infrastructure in the North and West of the country that's been destroyed. Key bridges, power plants, hospitals, water/sewage treatment plants that should be safe from RU bombing should be reconstructed now to enable some return to normality while the war continues in the South and East.

[Hooahguy]

Because it's been in the front and center of right-wing pro-Russian media as proof that the UKR govt are all nazis or neo-nazi leaning. Their imagine versus their reality is a bit out of whack. Sorta like a handfuls of 'professional anarchists' allowing all BLM protests to be portrayed as threats to the US Govt.

Something that seems to get lost on a lot of people is that Russia has just as many, if not more, nazis in their ranks. Case in point.

This is exactly why I'm still irritated that MiG-29s aren't being transferred over, the hardware has gone from man portable weapons to legacy MBTs and IFVs. Manned aircraft are not an escalation, especially as it's to help a country's fight for territorial integrity, not expansion.

Agreed. If the Czechs can send tanks, why cant we send MiGs? I get the hesitation around giving them heavier weaponry to not provoke Putin to use nukes, but at a certain point a bluff can be called. As long as NATO isnt directly attacking Russia I think we can start pushing some boundaries. Especially as Russia gears up for a renewed offensive in the east, so Ukraine will need all the help it can get.

I also hope that the US and EU are already trying to get funding to rebuild key infrastructure in the North and West of the country that's been destroyed. Key bridges, power plants, hospitals, water/sewage treatment plants that should be safe from RU bombing should be reconstructed now to enable some return to normality while the war continues in the South and East.

I do hope we pour money into Ukraine after to help rebuild, perhaps with seized Russian money. However, I dont think right now is the right time to start to rebuild, not when the war is still raging in the south and east. But more importantly, Russia is still hitting critical infrastructure. They have hit numerous fuel depots in recent days, and I am actually a bit worried that Ukraine will start to run low on fuel which would be catastrophic.

[Montmorency]

My God, such a beautiful steppe, marred by war.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1511867981596434434 [VIDEO]

Ukrainian getting heated in his Call of Duty match.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1511850466111418369 [VIDEO]

Want to know what this Russian propaganda campaign says?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Defend me today — I will be able — To defend you tomorrow

Abortion: Not a "matter of personal conscience", but the taking away of a person's life

#WeDon'tAbandonOurs

Typical Balkan Slavic conversation:

[Montmorency]

EDIT: Peskov announced today that "We have significant losses of troops. And it's a huge tragedy for us." Russian forces on the west bank of the river may be planning a withdrawal to consolidate the perimeter around Kherson.

Yuri claims that the Mariupol battlegroup has largely been wound down and diverted to the Zaporizhzhia front; I wonder what the latest reporting is. His most gif-worthy line: "The local garrison of Mykolaiv, as in Kharkiv, are awaiting the assault in horror."

But Youtube suddenly banned his account, and I had a backlog of some of his takes I needed to get through. At least there's a Rutube backup.


DoD assesses that of 130 Ru AF BTGs committed throughout the invasion, at least 80 are still in the AO today. That comports with my loose mental framework of the fronts, say at the beginning of the month (by oblast):

Kherson: 10-15 BTG
Zaporizhzhia: 5+ BTG
Donetsk/Luhansk: 30-40 BTG (of which 5+ Mariupol)
Kharkiv: 20-25 BTG

Not counting separatists, Rosgvardia, or PMC of course.

*****

The Ukrainian government is urging all civilians to evacuate the southeast in anticipation of even larger-scale warfare in the area. The American government meanwhile is finalizing some sort of Lend-Lease legislation (as spmetla reported) and the Pentagon has announced that Ukrainian cadres are being trained in the operation of the donated Switchblade drones. We'll need to send a lot more than 100 then.

But Czechoslovakia has already delivered some of its Soviet surplus armor to Ukraine, with more on the way.

The EU's Foreign Affairs High Representative admits that the EU has paid Russia €35bn for energy since the war began. Imagine Putin had spent the past 20 years funneling all this money into a sovereign wealth fund while preparing the Russian energy sector for global decarbonization and diversifying Russia's economy, instead of being a Goering.

German foreign intelligence suggests a role for PMCs in Bucha massacres.

@Montmorency

I'll send you the link shorty.

OK

Why does everyone get their knickers in a twist about the azov battalion?

a) it has very few nazi's in it these days , and nothing to say our witness was one - always a minority, now a very small minority.
b) it has been front and centre in the defence/devestation of Mauripol - and would provide useful witnesses from the frontline.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-60525350

Because it's been in the front and center of right-wing pro-Russian media as proof that the UKR govt are all nazis or neo-nazi leaning. Their imagine versus their reality is a bit out of whack. Sorta like a handfuls of 'professional anarchists' allowing all BLM protests to be portrayed as threats to the US Govt.

They're more January 6 than BLM - even scarier really. If the Azov essence had held sway over the 1/6 atmosphere, federal troops would have had to storm the Capitol to rescue Congress.

The OG Azov Battalion was absolutely stacked with ultra-right thugs, but they're almost all casualties by now. Real Kadagar types, often implicated in brutal street violence and hate crimes. But since they came under formal military command structure the government has weeded out the worst elements. Recently the brand has actually grown to see ~three new Azovite battalions stood up between Kharkiv and Kyiv, all being components of the National Guard Azov Regiment I believe. I have no idea what the organizational or ideological relationship between the OG battalion and these new ones is, besides the branding. They are however more ideologically mixed than the original militia.

While it is always a problem for fascists and other far-rightists to gain combat experience and fame, the most dangerous part of the frontline is the best place for them in a full conventional war where they're going to be fighting anyway. All told one would be hard-pressed to make the case that the Ukrainian military is more compromised by the far-right than major European militaries, let alone the American armed forces. Gratefully Ukraine has recruited/permitted leftist cadres as well.

As for the Greek volunteer Zelensky presented, I would suspect he was vetted beforehand, but I could be wrong and the impulse to find a Greek-Ukrainian (the subject was born in Mariupol) involved in the fighting overrode other considerations - someone has probably doxxed him by now. His prior service history could offer some clues.

Something that seems to get lost on a lot of people is that Russia has just as many, if not more, nazis in their ranks. Case in point.

Right, the Wagner Group and core separatist forces (plus outside volunteers and mercs) are predominantly neo-Nazi and the like. I mean, this is all beside the point of Russia itself being a fascist state.

[Furunculus]

Boris is making waves in Ukraine:

New - 120 armoured vehicles
New - Antiship missiles
New - Another 500m in loan guarantees
New - Removing tariffs and regulatory barriers on UK <> UKR trade

Oh, and he seems remarkably popular with the Ukrainian citizenry when he was taking a stroll around Kiev with Zelensky

https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...97668246384640

But he's just the worst, so we won't talk about it. :D

[Montmorency]

I don't know if this is a good or a bad sign, but this month the Russian domestic media have widely discarded the phrase "special military operation" for plain old "war." Hard to think of this as anything but a calculated rhetorical shift.

Yuri claims that Russian intelligence has obtained official lists of names of Ukrainian stay-behind personnel (partisans) - and he's gone into witness protection?? Also claims aRussian offensive SW of Izyum toward the Dnieper (Zaporizhzhia) - deep envelopment rather than envelopment through Slovyansk - will commence on April 12th according to sources.

Oh, and he seems remarkably popular with the Ukrainian citizenry when he was taking a stroll around Kiev with Zelensky

https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...97668246384640

But he's just the worst, so we won't talk about it. :D

Are you being cynical or serious?

[Hooahguy]

I don't know if this is a good or a bad sign, but this month the Russian domestic media have widely discarded the phrase "special military operation" for plain old "war." Hard to think of this as anything but a calculated rhetorical shift.

Yuri claims that Russian intelligence has obtained official lists of names of Ukrainian stay-behind personnel (partisans) - and he's gone into witness protection?? Also claims aRussian offensive SW of Izyum toward the Dnieper (Zaporizhzhia) - deep envelopment rather than envelopment through Slovyansk - will commence on April 12th according to sources.

My guess is that they want to achieve something major by May 9th, their Victory Day. Im skeptical it will commence on April 12th- repositioning and reconstituting units takes time, if you do it right of course. So they might just start the offensive anyways but I guess we will see soon enough.

An interesting development, if this turns out to be true: a report that Putin and Lukashenko are going to be meeting on the 12th about the war and doing a press conference after. However, it doesn't make sense that they would be meeting all the way on the Pacific side of Russia? Thats why I am skeptical. However, if this does turn out to be true I wonder if it would be the announcement of Belarus joining the war. While there is no way that Belarus could take Kyiv, I do think that they could apply just enough pressure to ensure that Ukraine wouldn't be able to divert as many forces east as it might want to to stop a major Russian advance there.

[Furunculus]

"Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
Oh, and he seems remarkably popular with the Ukrainian citizenry when he was taking a stroll around Kiev with Zelensky
https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...97668246384640
But he's just the worst, so we won't talk about it. :D"


Are you being cynical or serious?

Bit of both. Dryly amused at the level of visceral hatred people have to our clownish Bozza:

It drives them at such a deeply emotional level it prevents rational thought. Worse, it creates a cognitive dissonance where actions that do not fit the clownish persona simply do not compute.

He is a flawed man, he is also an inadequate man, and not one that I can truly say I really like, but people need to remember that a very large chunk of that clownish persona is artifice. And that in treating the clown'ish behaviour is 100% genuine leaves these people unable to comprehend that others do not view his every act through the same cloud of hate.

It's a funny world, it amuses me.

[Tuuvi]

Russia uses the day-month-year dating convention along with the rest of Europe. 3/4 means April 3rd.

I should've known, that was a dumb mistake on my part.

But it should be noted that this isn't remotely the case. It's a pernicious Russian libel and one that really ought to be cleared up now that the region has drawn our special attention.

First things first: I want to make it clear that I agree Russia is a reactionary state, and I don't condone it's invasion of Ukraine in any way, shape, or form. I thought I made that obvious by comparing Russia to Imperial Japan, but I don't know anymore.

Either way, I still think we are being fed a one-sided narrative by the Western press. In the years leading up to the current Russian invasion, it was openly reported that the far-right was gaining a huge amount of influence in Ukraine. But now that the US wants to send weapons to Ukraine, the Ukrainian far-right is being ignored or downplayed, and its influence dismissed as "Russian propaganda".

Does this mean that Ukraine is a Nazi state like Russia claims? Of course not. But this doesn't mean that the Ukrainian far-right has had no influence on Ukrainian politics either. I know that supposedly the Azov battalion has been "de-politicized", but I don't buy it. I think it's more plausible that the Azov battalion agreed to clean up their image and hide their more extreme views in exchange for being given official status in the Ukrainian military. Sure, maybe the overall membership of Azov isn't as extreme as it was before, but this doesn't mean there aren't still nazis in the ranks, influencing the newer members and waiting for a time when they can be more open with their views again.

If a reactionary, right wing militia like the Oath Keepers were incorporated into the US military in some way, and then claimed to be de-politicized, would any political person who wasn't right wing buy it? Of course not, and for good reason. We shouldn't believe that Azov has been completely de-politicized either.

I really dislike how the media has taken to reflexively framing any political claim or idea that comes out of a rival to US hegemony as post modern Orwellian double-think that should be automatically disregarded as cynical lies, because this way of thinking prevents critical, objective analysis of the situation at hand. Of course there are cynical lies in Russian propaganda, but there are truths also. Some of the lies contained in Russian propaganda probably aren't even conscious lies but rather beliefs held by Putin and the Russian ruling class. If we want to gain an objective understanding of what the Russian government is thinking and what is compelling them to act, we need to be willing to analyze the propaganda and pick apart the true facts and sincerely held beliefs from the deliberate lies, not plug our ears and scream "lalalalala" out of some childish fear that listening to Russian propaganda will poison our minds.

We also need to be willing to concede that the US and NATO are no angels and that Russia might have some legitimate grievances against the West. This doesn't mean that I support Putin or condone his foreign policy, it just means that sometimes evil begets evil, reality is nuanced and we should be just as critical of Biden's claim that the war in Ukraine is a war of democracy vs. authoritarianism as we are of Putin's claim that Ukraine is a nazi state based on a fake ethnicity designed to destroy Russia.

The reason I brought up Imperial Japan in my last post wasn't just because I found the ideologies and propaganda to be similar, it was also because I find the history behind Japan's fascist turn instructive for our current moment. Japan was absolutely justified in seeing the US and the other Western powers as a dangerous threat, but it responded to the threat by becoming an imperialist power in its own right and eventually adopting fascist ideologies. What we can learn from this is that if an "authoritarian" leader says they're trying to protect their people from US imperialism, they probably aren't lying, but that doesn't mean they are a progressive force in the world or that they aren't capable of committing aggressive acts themselves.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand this dynamic, so there are too many out there who think Putin is a cartoon super villain that needs to be stopped by making ordinary Russians miserable and pumping arms into Ukraine risking WW3 and nuclear annihilation, and there are too many "anti-war" leftists who think that Putin is actually a progressive anti-imperialist since he opposes US hegemony. Neither side has a complete grasp of the truth or a good solution. I'm horrified by the invasion and part of me is glad that Ukraine is receiving support, but I have to admit that in the long run what the US is doing in Ukraine is really just exacerbating tensions and stoking the flames of war.

[Montmorency]

First things first: I want to make it clear that I agree Russia is a reactionary state, and I don't condone it's invasion of Ukraine in any way, shape, or form. I thought I made that obvious by comparing Russia to Imperial Japan, but I don't know anymore.

Either way, I still think we are being fed a one-sided narrative by the Western press. In the years leading up to the current Russian invasion, it was openly reported that the far-right was gaining a huge amount of influence in Ukraine. But now that the US wants to send weapons to Ukraine, the Ukrainian far-right is being ignored or downplayed, and its influence dismissed as "Russian propaganda".

Reported by whom? It's really not. Not compared to Poland, and certainly not compared to Western Europe or the United States. It's the Russian far-right that's been demonstrably increasing repression in its country. Check the narrative.

If a reactionary, right wing militia like the Oath Keepers were incorporated into the US military in some way, and then claimed to be de-politicized, would any political person who wasn't right wing buy it? Of course not, and for good reason. We shouldn't believe that Azov has been completely de-politicized either.

You don't have to believe that these people are plush toys to see that a mythicized narrative has deliberately been constructed around them. Neo-Nazis almost-openly operate in the Marine Corps and the Air Force is dominated by theocrats. If the United States were to be impoverished and invaded by foreign enemies, you can bet the Oath Keepers would be part of any "Second Amendment Solution."

You have to be able to take stock of the existence of a far-right - one that exists everywhere - and assess its influence on society and politics.

I really dislike how the media has taken to reflexively framing any political claim or idea that comes out of a rival to US hegemony as post modern Orwellian double-think that should be automatically disregarded as cynical lies, because this way of thinking prevents critical, objective analysis of the situation at hand. Of course there are cynical lies in Russian propaganda, but there are truths also. Some of the lies contained in Russian propaganda probably aren't even conscious lies but rather beliefs held by Putin and the Russian ruling class. If we want to gain an objective understanding of what the Russian government is thinking and what is compelling them to act, we need to be willing to analyze the propaganda and pick apart the true facts and sincerely held beliefs from the deliberate lies, not plug our ears and scream "lalalalala" out of some childish fear that listening to Russian propaganda will poison our minds.

Sure. Political analysts specializing in just that are all over Russian propaganda. It deserves understanding, not credence, a judgement we could also make on the subject of Republican propaganda about woke tyranny and the death of America.

We also need to be willing to concede that the US and NATO are no angels and that Russia might have some legitimate grievances against the West. This doesn't mean that I support Putin or condone his foreign policy, it just means that sometimes evil begets evil, reality is nuanced and we should be just as critical of Biden's claim that the war in Ukraine is a war of democracy vs. authoritarianism as we are of Putin's claim that Ukraine is a nazi state based on a fake ethnicity designed to destroy Russia.

So what's the nuance in your view? What are the concrete legitimate grievances, and why does Biden's statement get compared to a genocidal lie?

What we can learn from this is that if an "authoritarian" leader says they're trying to protect their people from US imperialism, they probably aren't lying, but that doesn't mean they are a progressive force in the world or that they aren't capable of committing aggressive acts themselves.

We can objectively assess Japan's geopolitical context and compare it to contemporary Russia's. Russia does not face the threats Japan did, and has not for a long time. Ukraine, meanwhile, was under more immediate and concrete threat from Russia than Japan was from anyone else.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand this dynamic, so there are too many out there who think Putin is a cartoon super villain

Hitler and Hirohito weren't cartoon supervillains either.

that needs to be stopped by making ordinary Russians miserable

I haven't heard of a way to avoid it yet.

and pumping arms into Ukraine

How do we achieve the best possible conditions for Ukraine without considerable material support in its ongoing war? Your personal activism doesn't have to align with state foreign policy - there are millions of refugees to support and Ukraine will eventually need economic reconstruction - but we have to be realistic about outcomes.

risking WW3 and nuclear annihilation

If supporting Ukraine risks WW3 and nuclear war, then doesn't it seem like not supporting Ukraine and laying the path for years of brutal full-scale warfare in the region, or for Putin to establish his control over the territory, risks the same? Because the premise of the first requires that Putin is the sort of supervillain who poses an ongoing threat to the international community.

but I have to admit that in the long run what the US is doing in Ukraine is really just exacerbating tensions and stoking the flames of war.

Should I invoke that MLK quote? The only way to support peace in this conflict is to help Ukraine blunt the Russian war machine as quickly as feasible. That's the benchmark for how involved countries should orient themselves.

Recommended reading (auto-translate works well).

The Allies were no angels in WW2 - including the Soviet Union - and I'm glad we won. Independent Ukraine and its people have never done a tenth of the awful things that any WW2-era Allied power had, and that's the cold truth.

[Furunculus]

Does this mean that Ukraine is a Nazi state like Russia claims? Of course not. But this doesn't mean that the Ukrainian far-right has had no influence on Ukrainian politics either. I know that supposedly the Azov battalion has been "de-politicized", but I don't buy it. I think it's more plausible that the Azov battalion agreed to clean up their image and hide their more extreme views in exchange for being given official status in the Ukrainian military.

Literally, who cares?
n.b. i say this in geopolitical terms
Having a 'Nazi' battalion (who are subject to the rules of the land as is anyone else), has never been a justification for any foreign policy action, let alone the divine right to throw Westphalian Sovereignty in the ditch.
Not ever a justification for anything!

[Montmorency]

There is mainstream, but unsubstantiated, reporting that Sweden and Finland will apply for NATO membership at the Madrid NATO summit in June.

Literally, who cares?
n.b. i say this in geopolitical terms
Having a 'Nazi' battalion (who are subject to the rules of the land as is anyone else), has never been a justification for any foreign policy action, let alone the divine right to throw Westphalian Sovereignty in the ditch.
Not ever a justification for anything!

The far-right is always a threat to be taken seriously, as we in the West are very painfully learning. The relevant part for this war however is that Ukraine has less of a far-right problem than most countries in Europe and the Americas, and we don't hand out our solidarity to aggressors over victims. It's no surprise that many of those demanding solidarity for Russia are the same people who insist on privileging the perspectives of far-right white men in America and Europe.

The biggest threat of the Azov types is that they might be glorified for their feats of combat in the event of a Ukrainian victory, since after all a people's war tends to fortify nationalisms, such nationalisms being a big part of what got Russia into this mess. But this is a challenge to be confronted through civil society, as the US and EU have been doing through their cultural diplomacy, rather than throwing baby with bathwater into Lake Karachay.

[Hooahguy]

Reported by whom? It's really not. Not compared to Poland, and certainly not compared to Western Europe or the United States. It's the Russian far-right that's been demonstrably increasing repression in its country. Check the narrative.

To reinforce this, Svoboda, the only real far-right party currently in Ukraine, only got a single parliamentary seat (out of 450) in the last election.

Meanwhile here in the US we have multiple members of Congress cavorting with known white nationalists.

There is mainstream, but unsubstantiated, reporting that Sweden and Finland will apply for NATO membership at the Madrid NATO summit in June.

Looks to be substantiated.

[Montmorency]

On the topic of announcing things before accomplishing them, Zelensky publicized stamps commemorating the Snake Island defenders' defiance of the Russian Black Sea flagship Moskva, which Ukrainian Neptune missile batteries sank shortly after. Because Ukraine just sank Russia's battleship (cruiser).

BTW, spmetla, do you buy now that a swarm of Iranian ASM could sink a carrier in the Strait of Hormuz?

How's this for an idea: ammo buyback program for Ukraine. Private Americans have billions of rounds of 5.56 and 7.62 lying around, and the Ukrainians must be using millions daily, so the math is obvious. (Obviously it wouldn't work because it would just turn the right completely against Ukraine, but in principle it's a good way to redirect American 'assets.')

[Hooahguy]

How's this for an idea: ammo buyback program for Ukraine. Private Americans have billions of rounds of 5.56 and 7.62 lying around, and the Ukrainians must be using millions daily, so the math is obvious. (Obviously it wouldn't work because it would just turn the right completely against Ukraine, but in principle it's a good way to redirect American 'assets.')

Conveniently, a thread on twitter popped up earlier today on this subject.

To sum up, with a daily combat load of about 210 rounds per soldier, and with about 100k soldiers, Ukraine is burning through ~21 million rounds of rifle ammunition a day. If we include pistol ammunition that goes up a few million. And thats not including machine guns since they burn through ammunition so quickly its hard to even begin counting. I read recently that Ukraine had an abundance of manpower so they even stood a bunch of volunteers down because they had too many people and not enough equipment. Personally I think it would be smarter to keep them, but send them across the border to get trained by NATO forces and then sent back when equipment becomes available. I mean one can practice basic soldiering skills with a stick.

There's also the issue of artillery ammunition- per the thread, a single battery can fire a thousand shells in a day in an intensive engagement. As the commentator says, NATO forces are largely still geared up for COIN, not conventional warfare. As another example, the US has already given Ukraine about 1/3 of its Javelin stockpile, and I bet that the tap on those closes sooner rather than later- the US obviously cannot give them all away lest another theater heats up, like the Korea peninsula. The production process to replace those systems should be ramped up ASAP.

[Furunculus]

Ukraine just sank Russia's battleship (cruiser).

BTW, spmetla, do you buy now that a swarm of Iranian ASM could sink a carrier in the Strait of Hormuz?

this was always possible, and has become formalised in doctrine as the Royal Marines and USMC reconfigure away from mass over the beach to distributed operations. the risk from large and long range ASM's pushes vulnerable amphibious ships too far off shore for it to be their main role.

but the Moskva sinking appears to be incompetence rather than obsolescence:

https://twitter.com/alessionaval/sta...29987101175811

there are counters to all these problems, and they simply require that you use naval assets in a different way than was true before. but then it was ever thus; although lip-service is often paid to the military as a learning organisation generally, the ones that win wars do so by evolving their operation faster than their adversary can adapt to.

in the case of hormuz, not only is the threat growing but the importance of the gulf is diminishing. so, the US simply won't put capital assets there in future. it is notable that the UK's indo-pac strategy focuses on Oman rather than Bahrain. the Royal Navy's Indo-Pac role should be seen as 'guardian of the SLOCs' rather than 'guarantor of the Sheiks'.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...BTW, spmetla, do you buy now that a swarm of Iranian ASM could sink a carrier in the Strait of Hormuz?

The carrier driver folks I knew back in Virginia was always concerned by that stuff. USN damage control approach is top notch, the ships up-to-date and maintained, the defense layered...but in a narrows with limited maneuver and given enough incoming then nothing is guaranteed. You can never discount the "golden BB" effect when you are the one getting hit.