Jump to content

Ukraine: Slava Ukraini!!!


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Yeah, Putin really has to fear that the voting populace will be unhappy with him.

Seriously y'alll - you keep stating putin will be in trouble but have made zero effort to plausibly explain how he would be removed or who would think to do so. Dictators are not commonly ousted any more. Fidel Castro stayed in power far longer with far fewer successes and shittier popular support. Assad is still in power despite a civil war for 10 years. Do you think the electoral college is going to oust him?

There's also been a couple long-time dictators removed from power recently too. Robert Mugabe was removed via coup in Zimbabwe in 2017 when his inner circle and the military got tired of him. And Omar al-Bashir was removed via coup in Sudan in 2019 when the military turned on him due to the economic crisis there. Mugabe had been in power for about 40 years and al-Bashir had been for 20 years. Both seemed untouchable until they weren't.

No leader rules entirely alone, not even the Kims in North Korea. There are always elites that, while easily dominated individually, have the power if they unite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Yeah, Putin really has to fear that the voting populace will be unhappy with him.

Seriously y'alll - you keep stating putin will be in trouble but have made zero effort to plausibly explain how he would be removed or who would think to do so. Dictators are not commonly ousted any more. Fidel Castro stayed in power far longer with far fewer successes and shittier popular support. Assad is still in power despite a civil war for 10 years. Do you think the electoral college is going to oust him?

Assad is not a good example to provide considering the influence of foreign powers and the number of involved belligerents. But since you mentioned him, his struggle to maintain power started during the Arab Spring which saw a whole bunch of dictators or presidents who were dictators in all but name overthrown, violently in some cases. So this pattern of dictators not commonly being ousted anymore isn't there. 

Even just a few months ago Iran's theocratic government has looked more shaky than it's been in many years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dictatorships almost always look their strongest right up until they fall.  Nothing is ever certain when we're talking about the fall of someone like Putin.  Exactly how much would be too much is always pure speculation.  But if the Russian army loses control of Crimea, then the ultra-nationalists will probably abandon Putin as a failure, and that would be a big problem for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

I think that if Putin could end this war by getting official Ukrainian recognition of Crimea as Russian, that would be enough of a win that he could survive.

Not so sure of that. Remember, Putin got into power in the first place at least in part because powerful folks saw in him a man sympathetic to their long term aim of reestablishing Russia as a world power after what they saw as the US-inspired humiliation that was the collapse of the USSR. Sinc ethen, he's added former White Russians and Russian Orthodox hardliners to his coalition, again on the basis of restoring Russian greatness, which means expansion.

These folks waited twenty years or more to see Russian tanks rolling into Kyiv, as a starter. They understood it wasn't going to happen quickly but this was the moment. And if it's gone... Crimea isn't enough of a consolation prize.

I doubt that any one of them has the power to topple Putin. But can he stay in power if they all conclude that he's unable to deliver what they've waited so long for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, mormont said:

These folks waited twenty years or more to see Russian tanks rolling into Kyiv, as a starter. They understood it wasn't going to happen quickly but this was the moment. And if it's gone... Crimea isn't enough of a consolation prize.

I doubt that any one of them has the power to topple Putin. But can he stay in power if they all conclude that he's unable to deliver what they've waited so long for?

That is the big question, and we're all speculating here.  I think it's funny my last two posts are basically arguing the middle against both sides, with Kal is arguing that Putin is basically unassailable (which I do not agree with) and you arguing that his position is potentially very weak as a result of Ukraine, which I do not yet see evidence for. 

Yes, Putin absolutely needs to fear the ultranationalists he has brought into his coalition.  Crimea alone is a paltry victory, particularly since they already had that victory back in 2014 and this is just Ukrainian/western recognition of it.  But I think that Putin is playing the Russia vs the World narrative quite effectively.  Putin could claim that he fought NATO to a draw, Russia has demonstrated its strength, and that with Crimea safe, Russia has achieved its short term objectives.   Of course its bullshit and many hardliners will hate it.  But there will also be a faction in Russia that is relieved the war is finally over, and he can use them to bolster his support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fez said:

There's also been a couple long-time dictators removed from power recently too. Robert Mugabe was removed via coup in Zimbabwe in 2017 when his inner circle and the military got tired of him. And Omar al-Bashir was removed via coup in Sudan in 2019 when the military turned on him due to the economic crisis there. Mugabe had been in power for about 40 years and al-Bashir had been for 20 years. Both seemed untouchable until they weren't.

No leader rules entirely alone, not even the Kims in North Korea. There are always elites that, while easily dominated individually, have the power if they unite.

Okay, name them.

Name these supposed elites in Russia who have any actual power to challenge Putin, and talk to me about how they'll unite. Because from where I'm sitting there are not a whole lot of them who have any actual personal power, and all of them are (by design) at each other's throats. And sure, that can change. What is going to actually change that? Do you think they'll decide to challenge Putin because Putin lost Ukraine? Please. They're still crazy rich, they're still in power and doing whatever they want to. 

1 hour ago, Corvinus85 said:

Assad is not a good example to provide considering the influence of foreign powers and the number of involved belligerents. But since you mentioned him, his struggle to maintain power started during the Arab Spring which saw a whole bunch of dictators or presidents who were dictators in all but name overthrown, violently in some cases. So this pattern of dictators not commonly being ousted anymore isn't there. 

Even just a few months ago Iran's theocratic government has looked more shaky than it's been in many years.

Assad is a great example and the main reason I brought him up is to point out that a dictator when bolstered by other nations can survive for a long time. China is currently massively bolstering Russia; it's hard to get a better backstop for power than that. India is up there as well, but China is the big stick and shows no signs of backing down - in fact, they're at least talking about escalating. 

 

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

Dictatorships almost always look their strongest right up until they fall.  Nothing is ever certain when we're talking about the fall of someone like Putin.  Exactly how much would be too much is always pure speculation.  But if the Russian army loses control of Crimea, then the ultra-nationalists will probably abandon Putin as a failure, and that would be a big problem for him. 

Why would it be a big problem for him? Y'all keep saying how losing is going to be such a big problem - but why? Again, show your work - show me how losing ultranationalists from his supporting bloc actually matters to any degree now. I agree it mattered 25 years ago when he was consolidating power, but now? What power do these people have? How are they going to get the non-ultranationalists on their side, especially after Russia got their ass kicked? I mean, seriously - the ultranationalists in this scenario have been shown to be completely fucked and their viewpoint not achievable - and you're suggesting at the low point in their power that somehow they're going to actually be a problem? Please.

Iran is another example of a place that has nothing to do with Russia. Iran is absolutely fucked economically. Iran has massive protests in the streets, or did. Iran has pressures on every day-to-day life that real people feel. Russia has none of these things. I agree that if Russia actually started feeling the burn on the populace or actually showed any sign of general revolt that it'd be an issue, but so far none of that is true - and it will not be particularly true if Russia leaves Ukraine, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose nothing may happen to Putin since the next presidential elections will be approximately one year from now. And unless he decides to change the constitution again, he won't be eligible to run again. He's old, he's likely unhealthy, he may try to just find a successor. Likely the war will continue at least until the spring of '24. 

Kal is right that the Russian people aren't yet at the point where they may start a revolution against him. This Russia isn't at 1917 Russia levels yet. The only thing that could possibly happen is that if the war continues to go badly, and generals and government officials continue to be replaced along with oligarchs falling out of windows, that eventually some will try to form an anti-Putin cabal with the goal of getting rid of him by any means necessary.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

shittier popular suppor

This isn't backed up with what we saw and heard throughout all the time we spent there while he was still vital and running things.  It was a dreadful shock for the Cubans after both he and Raul were gone that they could no longer trust or believe in the government -- they still haven't figured out how to deal with it.

~~~~~~~~

Why the Russian Army Isn’t Learning From Its Mistakes
Though that doesn’t necessarily mean Ukraine is winning.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/03/ukraine-war-why-russia-army-isnt-learning-from-its-mistakes.html

Quote

 

.... But another key factor is that, as the war has evolved, the Ukrainians have adjusted their tactics and strategies to conditions and challenges on the ground—whereas Russians, by and large, have not.

“The Russian forces do not appear to be a ‘learning organization’ at all,” retired Gen. David Petraeus, former head of U.S. Central Command and former director of the CIA, told me in an email. “At this point, I wonder if they have any tactical-level leaders who even understand how to coordinate and synchronize the actions of all the elements required to achieve combined-arms effects.”

Lawrence Freedman, professor emeritus of war studies at King’s College, London, and the author of several renowned books on strategy, agreed. “I don’t think they can be [a learning organization] because they don’t have the kit, the command structures, accurate PGMs [precision-guided munitions], or the real-time intelligence to implement radical changes,” he wrote in an email. ....

.... “I’m [Lawrence Freedman] nervous about playing down what Russia can do, because they are far from defeated,” he said. “But for all the effort of the past years,” when Russia has built up its military and revised its warfighting doctrines, “they have precious little to show for it.” They still seem to subscribe to Josef Stalin’s line (which he may or may not actually have said) that “Quantity has a quality all its own”—the idea that, if you throw enough firepower into a battle, you can win even if you don’t fight very well. “That works,” Freedman notes, “until you run out of quantity.”

The Ukrainian soldiers are running short on quantity as well; both sides are using up a million artillery shells a month, and both have seen their armored vehicles chewed up by some of those shells. But Ukrainians are expecting a lot more Western weapons in the coming weeks, which some hope might turn the tide. (This is why the Biden administration is concerned that China might start sending arms to Russia, which could once again even the playing field.) ....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Kal is right that the Russian people aren't yet at the point where they may start a revolution against him. This Russia isn't at 1917 Russia levels yet. The only thing that could possibly happen is that if the war continues to go badly, and generals and government officials continue to be replaced along with oligarchs falling out of windows, that eventually some will try to form an anti-Putin cabal with the goal of getting rid of him by any means necessary.

I think this is the real issue I have with the theory that Putin will be challenged. So far Putin has been exceedingly good at killing or deposing any powers that have even the slightest indication that they might challenge Putin long before they would get any actual power to do so. It is also significantly harder now to do any kind of organization for cabals without being detected. Putin has been excellent at functional intelligence of internal sources. 

And that's why I am very skeptical of the argument of 'influential elites' deposing him. You'd have to have a lot of elite powers unified against Putin AND be able to coordinate together AND be able to do so without detection AND show a willingness to do so that has so far not been done. It remains an entirely theoretical exercise. This isn't like Yeltsin who had not remotely consolidated power, gutted military power, etc. This is a person who has consolidated power, influence and information for 20 years. 

My belief remains what it did a year ago - if Putin is going to be ousted it will happen because of popular anger, not because of internal elite or military coup. That is the one thing Putin can't control as well as he'd like to, especially in outskirts of Russia. And while I had hopes that sanctions would do that there is zero sign that Russia is going that way, or will be going that way. There is very little that the West can do to hurt the Russian economy now that China is propping them up. And the West is not going to go into an economic war with China to stop them from that - even if that would be successful, which it probably wouldn't be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Okay, name them.

Name these supposed elites in Russia who have any actual power to challenge Putin, and talk to me about how they'll unite. Because from where I'm sitting there are not a whole lot of them who have any actual personal power, and all of them are (by design) at each other's throats. And sure, that can change. What is going to actually change that? Do you think they'll decide to challenge Putin because Putin lost Ukraine? Please. They're still crazy rich, they're still in power and doing whatever they want to. 

Literally every single person in the Kremlin besides the admin staff. It's easy for Putin to kill a general, or a high level FSB officer, or anyone else. Because individually they are weak, no question. But collectively they are the apparatuses of the state itself, and they can easily remove Putin if there's a sea-change in circumstances. Dictators fall extremely easily if they lose that general support. There's nothing that makes Putin special compared to any of the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Fez said:

Literally every single person in the Kremlin besides the admin staff. It's easy for Putin to kill a general, or a high level FSB officer, or anyone else. Because individually they are weak, no question. But collectively they are the apparatuses of the state itself, and they can easily remove Putin if there's a sea-change in circumstances. Dictators fall extremely easily if they lose that general support. There's nothing that makes Putin special compared to any of the rest.

So...your hypothesis is that the entire Kremlin staff, led by...no one in particular...will just decide to depose Putin in such a way that it requires zero detectable coordination and also has no actual successor. Also, this hypothesis requires that this general staff somehow all stop supporting Putin or actually care about something other than Putin despite them being Putin's absolute most loyal area and have been absurdly improved under Putin at the expense of virtually every other area of power. 

I mean, okay? That could happen, I guess. But it's exceedingly implausible and is significantly lower in the list of things Putin should worry about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putin's power base is based on several support pillars:

  • The support of the oligarchs, based on making/keeping them rich. He has fucked this up. Many of the oligarchs are powerless, but several do have private mercenary armies and their ire at losing their riches and their cushy holiday homes on the Med is very real. Nobody wants to make the first move there.
  • The support of the military, based on investing in the military and expanding its capabilities. He has really fucked this up. But Shoigu and Gerasimov are both ultra-loyalists to Putin, so the anger of the rank and file is held in check at the moment.
  • The support of various power-brokers and special interest individuals who control individually powerful forces, such as Kadyrov and Prigozhin. So far their anger has been deflected towards Putin's underlings, not Putin himself.
  • The support, if tacit, of various criminal interests. That is still going on, and the criminal interests might actually have benefitted from the war in terms of profiteering and being able to expand activities because so much of the police force has sent to Ukraine (it's also triggered a series of very violent gang wars in the major cities, which they might be less thrilled about). 
  • The support of the provinces who otherwise might be thinking about breaking away. He has really fucked this up with several regions (most notably Tatarstan) but none of them want to make the first move in breaking away, and some regions that might be tempted to break away are wary of being subsumed by another entity (Buryatia eyeing the ambitions of China warily, but may feel emboldened by at least being on the other side of Mongolia to China).
  • The utter apathy of the Russian population. The war has moved the needle slightly on this last group but not hugely. Additional mobilisations will start to do that though.

I see no imminent threat from any of these quarters towards Putin, but there is scope from the grumbling dissent to get louder if the war continues to go poorly, and if Ukraine retakes most or all of its territory, it will get quite a lot louder. Ukraine retaking Crimea will really move the needle on that and would probably lead to much more notable criticism of Putin.

Putin's role in Russia is basically keeping sweet all the other factions who'd probably be murdering one another without him being there. That's created a situation where nobody wants to move against him, but if he gets taken off the board (and several factions seem to be happy to drop the other factions' associates out of windows) or dies of natural causes, the resulting situation with no appointed successor (and probably even if he had one) would be a recipe for civil war and chaos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, to be clear if Putin goes away I can see Russia being in a heap of trouble with a lot of problems and potential dissolution of the current Russian country. 

But I don't see that happening while Putin is in power, and it'll take a lot more for him to be even remotely threatened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the battle front, completely unhinged stories from Bukhat that Russian soldiers attacked Ukrainian positions without any guns or ammunition. In some cases they apparently rushed Ukrainian fixed fire points with shovels.

That sounds insane, but Prigozhin today unleashed a major rant that his ammo supplies have dried up, again, and Wagner forces have been going into battle unarmed as a result. He also said that the regular Russian forces have been so badly mauled in their attack  on Bukhat that they might not be able to take the city, and only Wagner can seal the deal (not exactly a surprising statement from his perspective).

More interestingly, Prigozhin says that he in particular and Wagner in general are now being setup as scapegoats on whom the loss can be blamed if the Russians need to withdraw from Ukraine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Werthead said:

On the battle front, completely unhinged stories from Bukhat that Russian soldiers attacked Ukrainian positions without any guns or ammunition. In some cases they apparently rushed Ukrainian fixed fire points with shovels.

That sounds insane, but Prigozhin today unleashed a major rant that his ammo supplies have dried up, again, and Wagner forces have been going into battle unarmed as a result. He also said that the regular Russian forces have been so badly mauled in their attack  on Bukhat that they might not be able to take the city, and only Wagner can seal the deal (not exactly a surprising statement from his perspective).

More interestingly, Prigozhin says that he in particular and Wagner in general are now being setup as scapegoats on whom the loss can be blamed if the Russians need to withdraw from Ukraine.

This jives with other reporting I heard this weekend on NPR - where one strategy Russians were using was shouting "don't shoot, we're Ukrainian" as they approached various positioned and then used that to attempt to do some damage. And apparently it was succeeding; it was causing some casualties for Ukrainians. Not a lot, mind you, but every little bit apparently helps. 

Per CNBC and ISW Ukraine may be undergoing a tactical withdrawal from Bakhmut:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-5-2023

That said, as expected even if they do take Bakhmut chances are virtually nonexistent that Russia can continue their offensive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Fez said:

There's also been a couple long-time dictators removed from power recently too. Robert Mugabe was removed via coup in Zimbabwe in 2017 when his inner circle and the military got tired of him. And Omar al-Bashir was removed via coup in Sudan in 2019 when the military turned on him due to the economic crisis there. Mugabe had been in power for about 40 years and al-Bashir had been for 20 years. Both seemed untouchable until they weren't.

The norm these days is that when a dictator is removed, we regress back to where we started either immediately or within a few years.  People (in general) may not be as aware of the current dictators in Sudan or Zimbadwe but the situation there is not particularly better than it was pre-ousting (arguably worse in some cases).

North Africa alone is littered with other examples: Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt.  Libya is the exception but only because its a lot worse off.  Throw in Myanmar/Burma, Ethiopia is regressing significantly, Mali, Afghanistan.  You could argue Hungary and Nicaragua are going back to pre-1990 but admittedly, I was more thinking about oustings over the last 10/15 years.

Anyhow, while Putin losing power seems unlikely right now, even if it happened, we are unlikely to end up in a significantly better situation, so, it doesn't exercise my mind.

Edited to add:  Ukraine is probably the exception to the ousting trend but Russia's war since 2014, weirdly, made it easier for Ukraine to stop reverting back to its norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medium-term, I wonder about the relationship between China and Russia, and how the dynamic may suddenly change to Putin's disadvantage.

Right now, China is weakly supporting Russia, not because they love Putin, but they would like to continue to purchase cheap energy and they would also like to get back in the game for Lake Baikal water to supply the dry region around Beijing.  And of course, weak support for Russia has some opposition to the US as the other side of the coin.

And Xi is busy consolidating power in China, collecting all the strands of power in his own grasp, which must be nice.

But as Putin expends the limited supply of Russian military power on Ukraine, you can't tell me that Xi doesn't look at Manchuria and remember that it used to be part of China.  Wouldn't it be nice for China if they suddenly owned both banks of Amur and Ussuri Rivers, as well as Magadan and Vladivostok and Khavarosk?  It sure would be easier to supply water to Beijing if that were the case.  And crossing the Amur is a lot easier than crossing the Taiwan Straight, if you have a burgeoning military power, but maybe worry that it isn't quite enough to get the job done in the ROC.

So it wouldn't surprise me if Xi supports Putin right up until the point when he doesn't, say in 2028 or so, and then Putin finds the Chinese have pulled the rug out from under him, and he needs to worry about the Far East all of a sudden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

So...your hypothesis is that the entire Kremlin staff, led by...no one in particular...will just decide to depose Putin in such a way that it requires zero detectable coordination and also has no actual successor. Also, this hypothesis requires that this general staff somehow all stop supporting Putin or actually care about something other than Putin despite them being Putin's absolute most loyal area and have been absurdly improved under Putin at the expense of virtually every other area of power. 

I mean, okay? That could happen, I guess. But it's exceedingly implausible and is significantly lower in the list of things Putin should worry about. 

I think the big problem with ousting Putin is that he’s just the tip of the iceberg. Many of the oligarchs that surround him and even large segments of the population appear to support Russia’s current policies towards Ukraine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. Ukraine may or may not be Putin's personal obsession.

There very likely won't be a liberal-democracy in Russia post Putin. We can agree on that much. Returning to pre-war status might be appealing enough for some of his heirs, tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

some of the vox pops I've seen of Russian everypeople is that they simply back Russia no matter what. It's not that they necessarily think Russia was right to invade Ukraine, but that since Russia invaded Ukraine it is right to support Russia in its efforts to conquer Ukraine. If the Russian govt decides to leave Ukraine that will be fine too.

Other vox pops, however have had people saying things like Ukraine is just a province of Russia, it should never have been allowed to separate.

So there is a bit of a mix there. Which is the majority version or patriotism I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...