Ukraine-in-a-thread

[gaelic cowboy]

Better off just telling em to take Crimea and off back to Moscow.

From a strategic point they wont want to annex the ground as every ethnic Russian "liberated" is one less voting in Ukrainian elections.

Russia needs control of Ukraine which means they need lots of Russians in it voting in elections.

Annexation of the east and crimea means west ukraine is free to join the eu/nato camp, i cant imagine the kremlin wants that.


So we can expect the old herring of "Russian Peacekeepers" for sure.

[Sarmatian]

Better off just telling em to take Crimea and off back to Moscow.

From a strategic point they wont want to annex the ground as every ethnic Russian "liberated" is one less voting in Ukrainian elections.

Russia needs control of Ukraine which means they need lots of Russians in it voting in elections.

Annexation of the east and crimea means west ukraine is free to join the eu/nato camp, i cant imagine the kremlin wants that.

That is also my view. Don't forget, quite a lot of Ukrainians vote for pro-Russian candidates. Annexing a part of Ukraine might alienate them, like NATO bombing alienated most (though not all) NATO supporters in Serbia and is a major factor that even now, 15 years after, there isn't a single serious party advocating it.

Putin is smart, calculated and careful, and I don't believe he's not aware of this. That's why I believe he won't move in unless he feels he has absolutely no other choice.

Maybe I'm wrong, though, and the current Russian administration feels that only Crimea and the bases there are important.

[Kadagar_AV]

As you understand, this is a break-away from the Ukraine thread.

To not steer the discussion away from current events I'd like to open up a more theoretical discussion around what "The West" CAN actually do if Putin decides to simply go for grabs.

I believe we all can agree that the worst-case-scenario (at least for Ukraine!) would be for the country to be used as a proxy battleground between the former power blocks. The country is smack bang in the middle of the power blocks, and either block will have a more than easy time sending jets from secure bases.

Both blocks have huge railway and road connections in to the country, meaning they can quickly fill up troops and equipment where needed.

I also believe the navy situation would be chaotic. I'm absolutely no expert here, but from the looks of it it would be hell for either side to control the waters (mainly because both sides easily can run jets over the Black Sea) .

Seriously, COULD we in the west actually do much, short of starting WW3?

1914 anyone?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Assuming we let Russia take Ukraine, or part of it, it's likely that remaining border nations (including a Rump Ukraine) would demand admittance to NATO, and it would be difficult for NATO to argue against that on a basic humanitarian level. At that point Russia starts WWIII if it wants to expand, either with China or the "west"

[Fisherking]

There are a lot of alternatives. Of course this is international diplomacy, so all sides are required to act like 6 year old boy. So there go most of the alternatives.

The wise choice is to send in neutral peace keeping forces. Someone with not interests in the region and ask for the Russians to withdraw.

They very well could paint themselves into a corner and blow things up though. Keep an eye on the propaganda.

[SwordsMaster]

What will happen is what should have happened a long time ago - it will split into East and West Ukraine along language/ethnic lines. There really is no way to govern a country where every national level issue is split 50/50. Ask Belgium. So the Western half can join the EU or something, and the East can join Russia, Georgia, Turkey, or whoever they want.

Neither Europe nor the US will go to war with Russia, and Russia know this. If they didn't over Syria, they won't here. It will take the EU a year to go through all the required committees to send some undertrained troops with proportional, sufficient quotas of minorities, women, and LGBT members proportional to their membership conditions, and amount of money received in the recession, and by then the party will be over. The US is stretched as it is, and Russia is not Afghanistan, so they will sit tight and at most throw some rotten fruit over the fence. Not their fence anyway, so aside from some half baked 'economic sanctions' there won't be much of a response.

The only ones who could sway this in any way are the other former soviet republics who hold some economic power over Russia. If they choose to see the intervention in Ukraine as a potential threat to their own independence. The likes of Kazakhstan, for instance. But they are already making too much money from natural resource exports through Russia and so I doubt they will do much either.

[Fragony]

Not all that much. It's most powerfull weapon,the argument to end all arguments; the godwin, doesn't apply.

[Fisherking]

The thing is that the US military could not fight Russia if they wanted to. Not today, And after the planed cuts, not ever. About then roughly 30% or more will be Special Forces. They are not war fighters. They are for low intensity or support for special missions.

The EU has no organized military and NATO troops would not be welcome.

They will likely not get anything done through the UN.

It could make the US rethink its defense strategy. It could lead to an arms build up, but this time it may be the US that can’t cut it for economic reasons.

I think sanctions against Russia is also a bad idea.

I will just wait to see what bad ideas they all come up with.

[HoreTore]

The wise choice is to send in neutral peace keeping forces.

What on earth would that accomplish?

[Kadagar_AV]

What on earth would that accomplish?

Let me rephrase; What peace would a peace keeping force keep?

Different cultural groups are at it

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The thing is that the US military could not fight Russia if they wanted to. Not today, And after the planed cuts, not ever. About then roughly 30% or more will be Special Forces. They are not war fighters. They are for low intensity or support for special missions.

The EU has no organized military and NATO troops would not be welcome.

They will likely not get anything done through the UN.

It could make the US rethink its defense strategy. It could lead to an arms build up, but this time it may be the US that can’t cut it for economic reasons.

I think sanctions against Russia is also a bad idea.

I will just wait to see what bad ideas they all come up with.

Russia has a million odd men - of dubious quality - the US has around half that - Europe can probably contribute between 500-250 thousand of variably quality - Britain and France alone can muster 150 thousand men.

NATA can fight Russia - they can't INVADE Russia but I doubt Europe has an appetite for conquest as Germany did, so that's less of an issue.

Of course, previous experience has shown the US to be a poor ally, see - WWI, WWII, Falklands - any democracy in the developing world.

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine - will the US back them, or will it cower and inadvertently cause WWIII.

See - here's the thing - Russia WON'T start a shooting war with the US, but it MIGHT start one with Western Europe which the US will join. So have a think about that.

[Montmorency]

1. Russia is in even less of a position to field a European wartime army than the US is.

2. Russia has no incentive to do this as it holds all the cards. If Ukraine were to join NATO tomorrow, it would be playing into them.

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia has a million odd men - of dubious quality - the US has around half that - Europe can probably contribute between 500-250 thousand of variably quality - Britain and France alone can muster 150 thousand men.

NATA can fight Russia - they can't INVADE Russia but I doubt Europe has an appetite for conquest as Germany did, so that's less of an issue.

Of course, previous experience has shown the US to be a poor ally, see - WWI, WWII, Falklands - any democracy in the developing world.

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine - will the US back them, or will it cower and inadvertently cause WWIII.

See - here's the thing - Russia WON'T start a shooting war with the US, but it MIGHT start one with Western Europe which the US will join. So have a think about that.

Bolded brilliance.

I am however with SwordsMaster on the ability of EU forces to do anything, anytime soon. I mean, honestly... If we send the troops to war, how would we be able to uphold the gender-equivalence-training-program the army goes through?!

[Major Robert Dump]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

[SwordsMaster]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

They don't have to. Once they prop up their ukrainian puppet they will not fight at all. Europe such as it is is not going to go to war over some post-soviet corrupt 'president' regardless of the current grand-standing.

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

I disagree.

Russia has shown that they can occupy territories quite successfully.

Also, exactly what WILL do the Ukranians have to fight a serious guerilla war? They were under the Russian umbrella latest in this very generation, so it's not like they are unaware they can live through it, and hopefully seek freedom by other than military means.

Don't get me wrong, of course there will be some resistance if Russia invades. But I doubt it will be more than Russia can handle.

This is not Afghanistan or Vietnam, I sincerely doubt they have the cultural WILL to resist Russia in any type of prolonged conflict.

[PanzerJaeger]

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine

You must be joking. The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago. They should not be viewed as actual combat forces, but instead state welfare. Ascribing any more potential to them than that is dangerous and could result in a Libya-esce "oops, we ran out of missiles" fiasco.

[Arjos]

Why would Putin/Russia invade the countries fueling russian economy by buying its natural gases?
Seems to me they've already won without firing a shot :P

[Gilrandir]

I don't disagree with you about Yanukovich. Hang him by his private parts. Hang Tyahnybok right next to him.

Then start the real cleaning, placing tycoons in jail and their political lackeys with them.

With the violence and tensions we have that is certainly a solution that is very prudent and legal. Both Yanukovych and Tyagnybok have supporters among ordinary people. Tycoons own vast network of entreprises at which millions of people (mainly in Eastern Ukraine) work. Do you want a civil war to acompany Russian invasion?

Declare military neutrality and preferably write it down in the constitution.

It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?

Offer them 20 years longer lease of naval bases in Crimea.

They have them according to 2010 agreement until something about 2048. Now how does it help us at the moment? Instead Russia has a foothold to attack from.

Legalize the reality that Ukraine is bilingual and make Russian the second official language in the country and guarantee rights of the ethnic Russians.

Ethnic Russians are not numerous. The vast majority of Russian speakers are ethnic Ukrainians. I won't go into details (if you want me to I can make a special post on linguistic situation, but it is not that simple and maps shown in this thread may be misleading), but officializing Russian as a second language will eventually spell extinction of Ukrainian in many social spheres degrading it to the status of the language of uneducated hicks from the sticks.

[Kadagar_AV]

Why would Putin/Russia invade the countries fueling russian economy by buying its natural gases?
Seems to me they've already won without firing a shot :P

Because the gas can be taxed however they want if they take over, while free countries pay market prices?

EDIT: Thanks for the insight GC, it's a very refreshing perspective on how the War-On-Terrorism have impacted on the armys ability to actually wage war. Swedens army model have mirrored what you describe post 9/11, directing its aim away from international warfare to intranational warfare (abroads).

[HopAlongBunny]

The "West" could do a lot of things.
They will actually do nothing.
Fight a war on Russia's doorstep => not gonna happen
Economic sanctions => unlikely, winter still gets awful cold and Russia has everyone by the gas
Pontificate and let talk radio go bananas => very likely

[Shaka_Khan]

What will happen is what should have happened a long time ago - it will split into East and West Ukraine along language/ethnic lines. There really is no way to govern a country where every national level issue is split 50/50. Ask Belgium. So the Western half can join the EU or something, and the East can join Russia, Georgia, Turkey, or whoever they want.

People shouldn't think about dividing countries without thinking of the consequences. Look what happened with Korea and Vietnam. Although there are different ethnicities in the case with Ukraine, the demographics are mixed geographically. Even in eastern Ukraine where there are large numbers of Russian-speaking people, there are significant numbers of Ukrainian-speakers in that region with the exception of Crimea. Ukraine doesn't want to lose territory and would want to protect Ukrainian citizens in eastern Ukraine.

Also, where would you draw the boundary? Having a third party decide the boundaries have proven to be disastrous in Korea, Vietnam, in African nations and in the Middle East.

Germany is an exception. Germany lost WWII and was in no position to start a civil war expecially when having superpower armies stationed there. After decades of peace, the Germans decided to continue with that peace.

[Sarmatian]

With the violence and tensions we have that is certainly a solution that is very prudent and legal. Both Yanukovych and Tyagnybok have supporters among ordinary people. Tycoons own vast network of entreprises at which millions of people (mainly in Eastern Ukraine) work. Do you want a civil war to acompany Russian invasion?

No, I want Ukraine to actually use its enormous potential and become a well-functioning and rich country. You can't do that with tycoons controlling corrupt politicians. I want Ukraine that has a strong enough economy and can be an important partner to other countries, not beg other countries for money so it doesn't go bankrupt.

There's no need to destroy the companies. It doesn't take a genius to know the way most tycoons acquired most of those companies wasn't exactly legal. Take them legally away from tycoons and sell them. There are many companies in the US, western Europe, Russia, China... that will want to buy them.

It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?

I didn't know that. Still, there's danger when some Ukrainian politicians advocate nato membership, secretly or openly.

They have them according to 2010 agreement until something about 2048. Now how does it help us at the moment? Instead Russia has a foothold to attack from.

They don't need a foothold, Ukraine is not in South America. You share a huge border. Foothold or no foothold, if they decide to move, there's nothing Ukraine can do to stop them.

Ethnic Russians are not numerous. The vast majority of Russian speakers are ethnic Ukrainians. I won't go into details (if you want me to I can make a special post on linguistic situation, but it is not that simple and maps shown in this thread may be misleading), but officializing Russian as a second language will eventually spell extinction of Ukrainian in many social spheres degrading it to the status of the language of uneducated hicks from the sticks.

Not if both languages are taught from the first grade of elementary school in all schools in Ukraine.

[Sarmatian]

You must be joking. The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago. They should not be viewed as actual combat forces, but instead state welfare. Ascribing any more potential to them than that is dangerous and could result in a Libya-esce "oops, we ran out of missiles" fiasco.

Russian army isn't in a much better state, except a small part that is combat ready.

No country in the world is prepared to fight a war of ww2 proportions.

[Brenus]

“It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?” Sadly, what is written in Constitution is not what makes the differences. The implementation of it does.
Now, I am against “minorities” (or communities) rights. If you have a “minorities” rights (or a need for them) that is the proof your initial constitution is wrong. No citizens of a Country should be in need of “special measures” to be protected by the law if all citizens are equals in front of the law.
But, in order to make the “minorities” part of a democratic state, first you have to re-assure the “minorities” that they are part of the Country. And when a Nazi bragged about how many Russians, Jews and others he killed, you put him in jail for murder; you don’t offer him a job.
Implementation of universal laws is the key for Citizenship Building, and more your have “special” “minorities” rights, more you are building on sands, especially when the “minority” in your country is a big “majority” on the other side of the border.

NATO will not engage the Russians. They didn’t in Georgia when the Georgian President (once upon a time the Champion of the Free World) started his ethnic Cleansing, thinking he would succeed as the Croatian Tudjman did. And Russia was far weaker than it is now.
NATO armies are now not in shape for a confrontation against a more or less equal enemy. Armed Forces are now stretch so thin that just to launch an offensive needing more than one battalion would take months (can’t be in Afghanistan, fighting the flood and parading at Westminster all the times). And I just imaging German Soldiers sent to the Eastern Front once again, Germany being probably the only Country being able to provide enough foot soldiers for this kind of operation.
Forget about short air campaign, as Russia can retaliate. Even Serbia, completely overpowered, succeeded to attack NATO base in Bosnia, in a sky totally controlled by AWACS.
So what are the options? Strong condemnation of Russia’s move, and err, that is it.

[gaelic cowboy]

Im guessing it would return political relations to extreme suspision this would hurt Russia in the long run.

[Brenus]

“Eh. I say America lets it happen. Let the EU defend its own territorial integrity, preferably with stuff they bought from us.” I would say let USA deal with what they started and pay it with their money. Then we will see how many “revolutions” will start. And US material is not that good any way....

In term of military intervention, the USA certainly doesn’t want to know if the Abrahams are not only good at crushing rusty T55 and militias. In a conflict against Russia, Air Campaign is not an option, as Alaska is not THAT far, and possibly Seattle and other Pacific Towns are in reach, not only to Air Attack, but submarines. So, all former war strategy against enemies unable to retaliate has to be abandoned.
The problem is when you start a war, you can’t decide when and where to stop.
The other problem of course is if USA wants war, it has to be launch from errr, European Territories, which are not that keen on this. The Russian troops are ready, at around 200 km; the US troops are not and are far. Ukraine not being part of NATO, there is no legal obligation to engage the Russian Armies. If fact, there is a lot of good reasons not to.
Thanks to cut and “end of Communism = end of History”, all European Countries dismantled their armies, and kept just “special” forces and specialised Regiments. In France, the new generation of tanks production was just halted as “we don’t need this very costly and ineffective material in the new generation of threats we are now facing”, forgetting that Bin Laden and Terrorism are not a real threat when powerful Armoured Divisions are.
Even don’t want to speak of the cancellation of the 2nd Aircraft Carrier, and the dissolution of Air Squadrons, Infantry Regiments, and destruction of factories producing Assault Rifles and selling of Army Facilities to investors.
In UK, we have an Aircraft carrier; unfortunately we don’t have the planes going on it.
So Europe (even including UK in it) is not ready to fight for a US war: Not militarily, not politically.
Want the SEAL or other “special Forces” will do in front of Armoured Divisions? Die bravely. Can they attack them? No.

“The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago” Yeap. Not for the second sentence, as the combat effectiveness is quite good, however the design of their mission changed, so they French Army is not able to face this kind of action, as every resources for this kind of war were wrecked by all successive government (starting by abolition of Conscription).

[Kagemusha]

According to Voice of Russia news channel and Andriy Parubiy from Ukrainian security council, Ukraine has today ordered full mobilization of its armed forces. The situation has gone to the extreme. All that needs to happen now is one bad call somewhere locally and the shit will hit the fan. I hope, no i pray that cool heads will prevail and what i am afraid will happen next can be avoided..

[Fisherking]

What on earth would that accomplish?

It moves the sides apart and reduces tension.

A neutral force to protect those Russian and Ukrainian peoples and not be a threat of annexing territory.

It should protect the stated interests of all parties without having them place people in harms way.

[Kagemusha]

If we are talking about the current situation at Ukraine. There is a solution. UN needs to send a huge multinational peacekeeping force there in order to cool the situation and prevent open confrontation between Russian and Ukrainian forces. It is pretty much the only chess move left to avoid Russia doing what it can and quite likely will. Once the situation would cool of all sides need to sit in the table and Russia should quite likely get parts of Ukraine, so the Russian interests in the area are secured, after that Ukraine should apply for NATO membership and thus the lines will be solidly drawn in the area.

We should all remember that Russia does not equate with Mordor, but that Russia has been loosing ground on most of its interest areas for quite long and there is only so much the Russian bear can tolerate, without collapsing from inside out and we really do not want that. Even with all the problems and quirks Russia as it is causes. We really do not want Russia to collapse into dozen diibadaabastans, which would create a hot bed of trouble like not seen in long time.

If we look at this in larger scale. What West can do is to re evaluate the situation and understand the real worst scenarios that can happen and stop living in a dream world effected by security consultants who think armed forces should be built according to "trends". USA should think what is really the role they want to have in Global security and what pros and cons their role will give to them.

Europe needs to pull their head out from their behinds and decide what Europe wants to be and act accordingly when it comes to security. For my country Finland.This Ukrainian crisis have clearly shown that we really need to forget already the past wars and understand that we cant fight our possible wars alone and cant remain without choosing which power block we clearly belong.Thus Finland should apply for NATO asap.

From my personal point of view. If in a hypothetical situation Russia would keep expanding to West and invade my country. As much as i like Russians as people. I have taken the pledge to protect my country from enemies outside and i would hold to it. So then it would be the bayonet, until i am dead or those threatening my land and my loved ones.