Ukraine 8

[Maithanet]

Taking a step back, it is hard to really judge how strong Ukraine's hand is right now, and how strong they think it is.  Militarily they are holding and in some places making small advances, but at the same time, hundreds (thousands?) of lives and billions of dollars of damage to their country is being done every day. 

It's looking more and more like Russia's position is bogged down, but if they decide to keep fighting for another week, it's not like Ukraine can stop them, and that's just more damage to the country.  And a week of fighting at this level is a LOT of damage. 

One good thing is that much of Kyiv isn't in artillery range (only rockets) and thus has been spared from the worst damage.  If Russia advanced another 5 km towards the city, they could do a lot worse. 

[Fez]

5 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I'm not sure I'd go that far, although Ukraine is going to be pretty averse to giving away any medium sized cities.  The water access issues in Crimea need to be resolved and that will probably require some territory changing hands.  If a few thousand Ukrainians have to flee their homes to stay out of Russia, then that is unfortunate, but not a dealbreaker. 

A few border villages is a very different thing than Mariupol. 

And unless their hand is forced, why wouldn't Ukraine refuse to alleviate the water shortages in Crimea?

[Werthead]

7 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Taking a step back, it is hard to really judge how strong Ukraine's hand is right now, and how strong they think it is.  Militarily they are holding and in some places making small advances, but at the same time, hundreds (thousands?) of lives and billions of dollars of damage to their country is being done every day. 

It's looking more and more like Russia's position is bogged down, but if they decide to keep fighting for another week, it's not like Ukraine can stop them, and that's just more damage to the country.  And a week of fighting at this level is a LOT of damage. 

One good thing is that much of Kyiv isn't in artillery range (only rockets) and thus has been spared from the worst damage.  If Russia advanced another 5 km towards the city, they could do a lot worse. 

Yup. It's about knowing the strength of your hand and when to play and when to fold.

The Russian and Ukrainian stated positions are not far apart. The problem is that the Russian unstated position is probably a lot further apart from the reality on the ground. Because it's unstated, the Russians can simply pretend it never existed and take a deal closer to their stated position. It's just down to whether the Russians accepting that.

There is also another key here about the Russian definition of "sovereignty," primarily including not having NATO on their borders and no long or medium range missile systems in Ukraine. It looks to me like those are all taken care of by Ukraine simply not joining NATO. However, Russia has voiced a (rare) sane point that Ukraine agreed to the Minsk Agreement and then immediately reneged on it by claiming they had a gun to their head. They don't want that to happen again, so I think they'll want to see the constitutional amendment removing NATO membership aspirations ASAP.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 hours ago, Fez said:

Oh for sure there's been tons of damage done. The latest estimate from one of Ukraine's ministers is that about $500 billion in damages have been done so far. And Ukraine's GDP last year was only $155 billion. So it'll take ages for them to rebuild everything without major assistance.

It's just been one small bit of fortune that the most important parts of Ukraine's economic engine have not been a major part of the damage. And probably can't be, unless Russia literally starts salting the earth.

Just to add to these numbers, I saw this morning that before the invasion only a small portion of the population was below the poverty line (granted, the number is very low to qualify). Now it's estimated at being over a quarter of the country with as much as 90% of the population at risk for falling below the line if this drags on for a long time. Just another thing to consider. 

21 hours ago, Werthead said:

Russia has captured the largest hospital in Mariupol, and might be holding staff and patients hostage.

Haven't seen any updates on this. It's believed there are 400 people being held hostage in the hospital. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Haven't seen any updates on this. It's believed there are 400 people being held hostage in the hospital. 

Are the Russians denying this or are they simply saying nothing?

[Werthead]

Weird situation where Lavrov and Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who are usually very dour and solely reiterating Putin's lines, are both offering upbeat (for them) estimations of diplomacy, but Putin seems to be downbeat. But they wouldn't contradict Putin in public. Possible facesaving exercise where Putin agrees to a peace deal "reluctantly for peace" for later domestic purposes.

Peskov has redefined "demilitarization" as Ukraine keeping its military but not having any foreign bases on its soil.

Ah, apparently there was a high-level communication between Russian and American leaders this morning (not the presidents) and it was a stormy conversation but the US did back a negotiated deal.

[Werthead]

Positions for the deal emerging:

• Russia ceases fire and withdraws.
• Ukraine adopts neutrality, agrees not to join NATO.
• Kyiv keeps its army but cannot host foreign bases (Russia just blew up the only thing that could be equated to a foreign base) or missile systems.
• The Russian language is given legal status in Ukraine.
• Ukraine recognises the Crimea as part of Russia and recognises Donbas republics as independent.

This deal is considerably more equal than expected. It sounds like Russia will not insist on keeping the gains it has taken so far, securing the land route from Crimea to Donbas, splitting off Kherson etc. No demilitarisation of the country.

I can't pass the paywall, so unclear on the specifics regarding EU membership. However, Peskov has said that EU membership is not a strategic issue for Russia. This was a few days ago, so who knows now.

Ukraine's main sticking point will be the Donbas Republics. I think that they'll have known from Day 1 that this demand was there and will have been working on it. Refusing it means no deal and risking a dangerous escalation and a very long war. Agreeing to it might mean Ukraine being sliced to ribbons by a thousand cuts over a long period of time.

Ukraine also seems to be keen on getting someone to secure the deal, as they are worried about a six-month peace that gives Russia time to start building up again rather than a longer-term deal.

Simultaneously with that, Putin seems to be embarking on a tirade against the oligarchs, against people who say they are Russian but live elsewhere in luxury with their creature comforts. I wonder how much of this was arranged with the idea of driving down the power of a class who were a potential (if remote) danger to him. Possible preparation for internal purges.

[Werthead]

Apparently Russia is not opposed to the US, UK and Turkey guaranteeing the deal, which is weird, as isn't that like NATO membership? Unless Putin assumes that next time he does this, he is going after NATO directly.

Unless Putin can pull off a false flag operations so spectacular it convinces the guarantors that Ukraine was the aggressor. Or he actually plans to fulfil the terms of the deal and now pivots to crushing internal dissent and purging the oligarch class for several years.

[Maithanet]

19 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Positions for the deal emerging:

• Russia ceases fire and withdraws.
• Ukraine adopts neutrality, agrees not to join NATO.
• Kyiv keeps its army but cannot host foreign bases (Russia just blew up the only thing that could be equated to a foreign base) or missile systems.
• The Russian language is given legal status in Ukraine.
• Ukraine recognises the Crimea as part of Russia and recognises Donbas republics as independent.

This deal is considerably more equal than expected. It sounds like Russia will not insist on keeping the gains it has taken so far, securing the land route from Crimea to Donbas, splitting off Kherson etc. No demilitarisation of the country.

To me the threat of Russia giving it another go in 6 months is remote so long as they withdraw all the way back to the borders as they were on Feb 23.  What advantage would Russia have in Oct 2022 that they didn't have in Feb?  They wouldn't be starting any further forward and their economy will be worse off.  In contrast, Ukraine would have a bunch of foreign aid (way more stingers, javelins, manpads, etc) and a large pool of now combat veteran men and women to use them.  I expect that at least for the foreseeable future, Ukrainian air defenses will be very strong indeed (until the 2022 weapons start showing their age). 

It would be a tough pill to swallow to give up the Donbas republics, but Russia is never going to give that up unless Ukraine physically recaptures most/all of that territory.  That's not going to happen anytime soon and probably not ever. 

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Werthead said:

Apparently Russia is not opposed to the US, UK and Turkey guaranteeing the deal, which is weird, as isn't that like NATO membership?

Unless Putin can pull off a false flag operations so spectacular it convinces the guarantors that Ukraine was the aggressor. Or he actually plans to fulfil the terms of the deal and now pivots to crushing internal dissent and purging the oligarch class for several years.

Perhaps the thing that Russia is most concerned about with NATO membership is US/EU planes and missiles stationed in Ukraine so close to the border.  So long as that is prohibited in the treaty, then allowing a defensive security guarantee might be acceptable to them.  If so, that would be great for Ukraine, as I imagine the guarantee is what they value most. 

[Maithanet]

Ukrainian air defenses getting stronger.

 

[Derfel Cadarn]

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The graphics are excellent.  

Fyi, if you find footage of missiles being shot down, check it’s not the vintage game, Missile Command:P

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

21 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Fyi, if you find footage of missiles being shot down, check it’s not the vintage game, Missile Command:P

[Kalbear]

53 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Perhaps the thing that Russia is most concerned about with NATO membership is US/EU planes and missiles stationed in Ukraine so close to the border.  So long as that is prohibited in the treaty, then allowing a defensive security guarantee might be acceptable to them.  If so, that would be great for Ukraine, as I imagine the guarantee is what they value most. 

I don't see why. The baltics are closer, already part of nato and were more willing until recently to want to go fuck Russia up or at least threaten to.

It's just a face saving thing along with making it easier to roflstomp Ukraine in a year or two without having to worry about pesky us soldiers dying 

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

I don't see why. The baltics are closer, already part of nato and war more willing until recently to want to go fuck Russia up or st least threaten to.

If the US had planes and short range missiles in Ukraine they could threaten a great deal more of Russia than they can from the Baltics. 

 

6 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

It's just a face saving thing along with making it easier to roflstomp Ukraine in a year or two without having to worry about pesky us soldiers dying 

??  Do you think Russia is going to give this another go in the next couple of years?  Feels pretty unlikely to me.  The peace treaty they're negotiating is pretty clearly a loss disguised as a win to save face for Putin, but it's no secret that Russia just got it's ass kicked.  As a result of this invasion:

 - Ukraine is staunchly anti-Russia and politically reliant on the West to defend itself. 

 - Russia's economy is crumbling, it's military was just embarrassed, and it is far more politically isolated.

 - Europe is united and anti-Russia in a way it hasn't been for the past 30 years.

 - Germany is rearming. 

Those are huge geopolitical losses.  In exchange they get Crimea and a tiny portion of the Donbas, and Urkaine agreeing not to join NATO, which they weren't going to do anytime soon anyway.  So basically Russia got nothing it didn't already have. 

[Werthead]

We should note that this is the peace proposal. It's not been solidified, signed or fully agreed to yet.

14 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

I don't see why. The baltics are closer, already part of nato and were more willing until recently to want to go fuck Russia up or at least threaten to.

It's just a face saving thing along with making it easier to roflstomp Ukraine in a year or two without having to worry about pesky us soldiers dying 

How does it make it easier if the US is guaranteeing the peace?

The only way that can make sense is if Russia thinks it can eliminate the USA, somehow (either directly in conflict or by hoping the US disintegrates in social chaos or Trump gets back in), or if they are genuinely not planning to overthrow the treaty, or maybe they can cause a false flag attack and blame Ukraine.

[Werthead]

Interesting. So I wonder where the areas are that Peskov and Lavrov see as possible compromises.

[Gorn]

I don't think Ukraine is in any hurry to sign anything right now. With the mobilization of reservists, they now actually outnumber the Russians by a significant margin, huge amounts of aid and supplies are arriving, and the battlefield situation is changing in their favor.

The only currently critical point for them is the siege of Mariupol, but I can see them making a cold calculation to sacrifice that city in return for gains elsewhere.

[Werthead]

6 minutes ago, Gorn said:

I don't think Ukraine is in any hurry to sign anything right now. With the mobilization of reservists, they now actually outnumber the Russians by a significant margin, huge amounts of aid and supplies are arriving, and the battlefield situation is changing in their favor.

The only currently critical point for them is the siege of Mariupol, but I can see them making a cold calculation to sacrifice that city in return for gains elsewhere.

I don't think the Ukrainians are going to be that cold. It's not just Mariupol, it's multiple other cities where hundreds to thousands of people have died or are in danger of dying.

I think Ukraine is also very aware of the risk of flat-out defeating the Russian army and forcing them out of Ukrainian territory without an agreement, allowing Russia to potentially retaliate with WMDs once their troops are out of the firing line. A deal is the best way out of this as long as it is not total bullshit.

[Gorn]

21 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I don't think the Ukrainians are going to be that cold. It's not just Mariupol, it's multiple other cities where hundreds to thousands of people have died or are in danger of dying.

I think Ukraine is also very aware of the risk of flat-out defeating the Russian army and forcing them out of Ukrainian territory without an agreement, allowing Russia to potentially retaliate with WMDs once their troops are out of the firing line. A deal is the best way out of this as long as it is not total bullshit.

A problem with deals is that they require a trustworthy negotiating partner on the other side, and the Russians aren't one. Budapest Memorandum was also supposed to be a binding deal that would guarantee security to Ukraine.