Civil war in Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
by Malcolm Davis

March 13, 2015 @ 6:57 PM
I agree, the Putin in 'Wolf's Lair' scenario is perhaps one of the most interesting ones. Let's speculate on that for a moment. What if Russia were going to unleash a full scale invasion of Ukraine? Stratfor did a rather entertaining analysis on this a few days ago – see https://www.stratfor.com/video/wargaming-russias-military-options-ukraine though they followed it up with a very tactical level analysis on US-NATO response options which was a bit dissapointing due to the absence of strategic thought and the total absence of considering Russian escalation (see https://www.stratfor.com/sample/analysis/what-west-could-do ). Personally, I doubt that the US or NATO would respond to a Russian military campaign to grab all of eastern and southern Ukraine up to the Dneiper (which is what the first Stratfor link seems to suggest is possible) by intervening militarily in Ukraine as the second Stratfor analysis suggests, but the Russians could not assume there would be no response. So, maybe they are preparing for a 'big show' in Ukraine that could potentially touch off a direct Russia-NATO clash. If that were the case I doubt Putin would be carrying on with the daily business as usual in the Kremlin – all his attention would be focused on the possibility of a major war looming.

Let's just speculate that a new Russian offensive in Ukraine did see some sort of NATO response. Once again, I need to emphasize that I doubt this would happen. I don't think Obama would have the balls to confront the Russians eyeball to eyeball, and I don't think Europe is unified or has the resolve to do so without the Americans. But let's just say for argument's sake there was a response. A conventional military conflict in Ukraine between Russia and NATO could escalate very quickly indeed and whilst the Russians might have an immediate and regional military advantage, over time the correlation of forces would inevitably change in NATO's favour if Russia refrained from attacking NATO air bases and ports to prevent reinforcement. The Russians in this scenario would face three options – eventual defeat in Ukraine; conventional escalation by attacking NATO directly to prevent rapid reinforcement; or a rapid move to 'nuclear de-escalation'. Ukraine is a core interest to Moscow and I don't see how Putin could accept defeat and rollback at the hands of NATO forces and stay in power. That could bring on the very coup that is one of the other (more likely) explanations for his absence. So Russia either escalates conventionally by attacking NATO's rear to raise the cost of the conflict to unacceptable levels and prevent a NATO operational success in Ukraine, or he looks at the 'nuclear de-escalation' option.

The Russians talk openly about this option – the use of a single or small number of nuclear weapons to bring a conventional conflict to a close on terms favourable to Russia. Would a Russian nuclear attack – say with one weapon detonated in a manner to cause minimal casualties and destruction have the desired strategic effect of forcing NATO to pause and reconsider continuing a conventional battle? Or would NATO be forced to respond in kind? It's impossible to know how they would respond if the nuclear precipice were actually crossed for the first time since 1945. The Russians would know this too, and would have to be prepared for NATO counter-responses. If NATO did back off quickly, it would be a huge strategic victory for Russia because NATO credibility would be utterly gone. But is that worse than an escalating series of nuclear exchanges? The Russians could not guarantee that NATO would blink. NATO might call Moscow's bluff and fire a nuclear warning shot back in response, and then the ball is in Moscow's court.

Now, here's the interesting thing. At the moment the Russians have NO functioning missile early warning satellites. The last one failed a few weeks back. So they are entirely dependent on ground-based radar (their equivalent of BMEWS) to detect a nuclear attack from the West. That means they are not well placed to fight a nuclear war in a traditional sense. But if they had to do it now or in the next few weeks, would it not make sense for them to carry out a decapitation strike against key US and NATO political and military leadership, as well as nuclear command and control, in order to throw any nuclear response from the US into utter dissarray and maybe make it completely ineffective? If I were a Russian nuclear planner that's what I'd be thinking – fight asymmetrically to turn inferiority into advantage, even at the nuclear level.

So, if we are talking about the 'less likely' scenario of Putin preparing for some major escalation in Ukraine (or elsewhere – the Baltics?) that would have to entail preparation for potential nuclear war. All those Russian training missions with their bombers, and the nuclear command and control exercises in recent months would fit in with that.

Would this actually happen? I doubt it, and I think Tom's assessment that Putin is ill is probably the most likely explanation, or the possibility of a palace coup. But if we don't think about the unthinkable, then the unthinkable has a bad habit of biting us on the ass when we least expect it. If I were in STRATCOM, I'd be watching Russia's nuclear forces and their message traffic very carefully.
If Putin Dies | The War Room
 

bhramos

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
25,644
Likes
37,250
Country flag
Video by journalists. "In the Kherson region there was a terrible accident involving BMP punitive APU. The accident left one person dead, another was on a hospital bed in a serious condition. On the road and collided BMP car" Fiat ", in which there were two people . As a result of the accident 63-year-old driver "Fiat" from injuries died at the scene, his daughter, who was in the passenger seat, was seriously injured and was admitted to the hospital. According to preliminary reports, the accident occurred due to the fault of the driver of BMP, which moved in the direction of the peninsula Chongar. Driver war machine lost control and drove into the oncoming lane, where the moving "Fiat". Passenger car, trying to avoid a collision, pull over, but avoid the accident failed. Currently, law enforcement officers investigate the cause and the circumstances of the incident. "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JEFVoxako
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Voice of America Tells the Truth about Ukraine, Hell Freezes Over

VOA is full of surprises.

RI Staff [SOURCE]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO1yUWWqI0k

According to VOA: "The continued fighting in eastern Ukraine and the shelling of civilian neighborhoods seem to be pushing more men to join the rebellion." How odd!
Disclosure: I tried to listen to the YouTube video, but when I clicked it, it said that the video was removed by the user. This VoA link, where this commentary was allegedly hosted, appears to have been allegedly taken down as well.

[HR][/HR]

Another source:

VOA gets surprisingly close to telling the truth about the Ukraine conflict Perhaps it is deliberate, or maybe it is a slip-up on the part of their editorial staff, but this report from Voice of America comes very close to revealing the true driving force behind the conflict in East Ukraine. According to report, the shelling of civilian neighbourhoods and the high number of civilian casualties, far from discouraging the take up of arms, are encouraging more men to join the rebellion.
Read more at: http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/vo...telling-the-truth-about-the-ukraine-conflict/
 

AVERAGE INDIAN

EXORCIST
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
3,330
Likes
5,416
Country flag
Ending Ukraine's Other War mixed article but some good points

WASHINGTON — Twenty-five years after the Cold War's end, the struggle for Ukraine's survival as an independent nation has become a test of the character of our time. Since the protests last year on the Maidan, Kiev's main square, the country has faced two crippling wars: a hot one over its eastern provinces, and another one over efforts to prevent its political and economic disintegration.

The hot war in its rebellious, Russian-supported provinces is tentatively on hold, thanks to the latest Minsk cease-fire agreement. It has killed over 6,000 people and displaced a million more. Several major towns in the region look eerily like ruins of World War II.

The other war — less deadly but no less existential — is not about holding territory but about building a well-functioning state and economy. The months of euphoria on the Maidan have given way to awareness that Ukraine has been a quasi-failing state since the Soviet Union's collapse. Saddled with an unreconstructed Soviet-era bureaucracy and riven by corruption, Ukraine survives today largely on the good will of several oligarchs. More robbers than barons, these bosses control key provinces, fund private armies and finance divisive factions in Parliament.

The good news is that a free and fair general election last fall brought in a new government with solid competence in several key economic cabinet posts. Moreover, the International Monetary Fund has just approved a $17.5 billion, four-year program that will provide an essential financial lifeline. The I.M.F. deserves credit for boldness; this is a rare case in which the agency has lent financial support during an ongoing conflict.

In the near term, the first tranches of the aid package should be enough to stabilize the country's currency, the hryvnia, which has been in free fall. Yet overall it is likely to be underfunded — an estimated $40 billion in additional aid is needed, the sources of which are as yet uncertain. Moreover, the I.M.F. program requires Kiev to implement deeper structural reforms in just a few financial quarters than it has managed to achieve in two decades. No reform is more important than removing the distorting energy subsidies that have fueled corruption and dependence on Russia.

The West should be prepared to do more, applying the Colin Powell doctrine of "overwhelming force" to support Ukraine's economy, including substantial debt relief and more bilateral aid. This will require far more robust and creative activism from Western capitals, foremost Washington and Berlin, than we have seen so far.

The donors conference scheduled in April will be important. In addition to direct budget support, technical assistance and investment promotion, future reconstruction costs for the ruined provinces must be taken into account. Donors recall Ukraine's poor performance on several previous I.M.F. programs. They are also mindful of the hazard of throwing good money after bad, as occurred with the Russian bailout in 1998, when banks made out like bandits while the economy tanked.

How could things be different this time? The practical but imperfect answer lies in a series of reforms aimed at reducing corruption and empowering citizens. The measures should include enhanced financial surveillance and safeguards in the banking system, transparency and public accountability, cutting red tape, downsizing the bloated bureaucracy, judicial reform, an independent ombudsman and whistle-blower laws. The direct involvement of an energized civil society in this transformation process will be crucial. After all, civil society started it on the Maidan — on Independence Square.

The wild card remains Russia. President Vladimir Putin veered in a supremely reckless direction by annexing Crimea and engaging in a thinly veiled irredentist war in Donetsk and Luhansk provinces. Where will the Kremlin's post-Cold War revisionism end? Other neighbors are understandably nervous and preparing for the worst. As the former Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko put it to me last week in Kiev, Mr. Putin's goal is "not territory but space," meaning a colonial sphere of influence.

Turning the Minsk cease-fire into a lasting peace will require rigorous diplomacy to resolve issues such as the rebel provinces' status and cultural autonomy within Ukraine, as well as the country's status within the European and Eurasian security context. A period of neutrality, respecting Russia's vaunted if misplaced geopolitical anxiety about "encirclement," seems a more plausible outcome than NATO membership.

Throughout the crisis, Mr. Putin has been careful to continue referring to Russia's "Western partners" and to hold the door open for a degree of cooperation on Ukraine's debt, energy supplies, trade relations and reconstruction. Philanthropy is certainly not his motive, but chaos in Ukraine is in nobody's interest.

To be clear: For national success, Ukraine must achieve both a durable political settlement in the east and an economic turnaround based on wholesale reinvention of the state. The work of Ukrainians themselves is essential, but without stronger Western support, the odds of progress will diminish.

Since 2004, the people of Ukraine have staged two Maidan protests expressing their aspiration for a modern country free of kleptocracy and allowed to associate with Europe. Social expectations — and discontent — remain high.

If there is a third Maidan, it could look more like a Ukrainian Weimar. Cynics in the Kremlin understand this, and so must the West.


Mark Medish served as a senior White House and Treasury official in the Clinton administration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/opinion/ending-ukraines-other-war.html?_r=0
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Kick Who Out? SWIFT Gives Russia a Seat on the Board

There are 25 available board seats, and each seat is allocated for a three-year term to a specific country.

Simon Black (Sovereign Man) [SOURCE]

This article originally appeared at Sovereign Man.



One entity that isn't joining the US effort to torpedo Russian economy

If Vladimir Putin is remotely capable of laughter (the jury is out on that one"¦) then he's probably doing so right now.

Russia is once again Arch-Enemy of the United States. It's like living through a really bad James Bond movie, complete with cartoonish villains.

And for the last several months, the US government has been doing everything it can to torpedo the Russian economy, as well as Vladimir Putin's standing within his own country.

The economic nuclear option is to kick Russia out of the international banking system. And the US government has been vociferously pushing for this.

Specifically, the US government wants to kick Russia out of SWIFT, short for the Society of Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications.

That's a mouthful. But SWIFT is an important component in the global banking system because it lays the foundation for banks to communicate and transfer funds with one another.

It's a network protocol of sorts. Whenever a bank in Pakistan does business with a bank in Portugal, the funds will clear through the SWIFT network.

According to the SWIFT itself, they link over 9,000 financial institutions worldwide in over 200 countries, which transact 15 million times per day.

Bottom line, being part of SWIFT is critical to conducting business with the rest of the world. And if Russia gets kicked out of SWIFT, it would be a disaster.

Now, SWIFT is technically organized as a 'Cooperative Society' and governed by a board of directors.

There are 25 available board seats, and each seat is allocated for a three-year term to a specific country.

The United States, Belgium, France, Germany, UK, and Switzerland each hold two seats. A handful of other countries hold just one seat. And of course, most countries don't hold any seats at all.

Here's what's utterly hilarious—

On Monday afternoon, not only did SWIFT NOT kick Russia out"¦ but they announced that they were actually giving a BOARD SEAT to Russia.

This is basically the exact opposite of what the US government was pushing for.


Awkward"¦

But this story is even bigger than that.

Because at the same time that the US government isn't getting its way with SWIFT, the Chinese are busy putting together their own version of it called CIPS.

CIPS stands for the China International Payment System; it's intended to be a direct competitor to SWIFT, and a brand new way for global banks to communicate and transact with one another in a way that does NOT depend on the United States.

We'll talk about CIPS in more details in a future letter. But in brief, it addresses some serious weaknesses, inefficiencies, and technological challenges of SWIFT.

And it should be ready to go later this year.

Make no mistake, this is the beginning of the end of the US dollar's global hegemony. It's time to stop hoping that it won't happen and time to start preparing for it.
[HR][/HR]

Some interesting comments:

scanfish8 hours ago

It is also the beginning of the end for effective financial sanctions as a geopolitical weapon of coercion, such as is being used to hobble Russia and Iran and prevent them from trading.

This SWIFT offer to Russia is in the end meaningless as they already have theirs up and running and which will go global in May, followed by China's in September. Iran just has to hold on a little longer before they can begin trading internationally again and selling their oil. Short of direct military action, the US sanctions game is up.

Even Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela and all those nations who have been threatened with economic sanctions can now breath easy. The irony in this is that the US brought this on itself in treating Russia and China like subservient disobedient minions, now they have ended up burning their fingers to the third degree. The stupidity is not just astonishing..it is hilarious!

scanfish Vtran "¢ 8 hours ago

Thanks! In fact, the ramifications of China and Russia's new international money transfer systems are going to be earth shaking for the dilution of US power, because far more than the US military, its ability to wield and use its financial muscle has been its most effective power.

Now Russia and China are effectively sawing off one leg of a three legged stool and it is almost done, the other legs being control of the IMF/World bank and US dollar reserve currency status. The BRICS New Development Bank and the AIIB (Asian infrastructure investment bank), and the coming reserve status of the Yuan, are the other saws now being sharpened.

Soon, the US will only have its military left..and even that...days are numbered when the fiat money runs out.

Vtran scanfish "¢ 7 hours ago

Agree. Add also the Shanghai Stock Exchange where the Gold Bars can be counted, unlike the last "full audit" ... One room visited, the auditors had to stand 60 feet from the bars, no cameras were allowed, done in 1953 ! Subsequent "partial audits" have been done where Gold from one room has allowed to be weighed, checked for consistency and no more checking is needed, as taken on "Good Faith " !!!
-
Even the USA Military isn't that cracked up to be - the Mercenaries / "Civilian" Contractors will turn against them as driven by the highest bidder !
-
They Say, September as when all the Cards collapse .. September may not be the month of collapse, more like the month the collapse started in earnest !
-
Slightly Aside - Vietnam said NO to USA request and will allow Russia Armed forces on their Territory (refuel etc) and Russia and Vietnam have embarked on a Joint Submarine Maintenance Facility in Vietnam !!
Commentary: Was it you @Akim who was speculating that Russia was going to be evicted from SWIFT?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
The good news is that a free and fair general election last fall brought in a new government with solid competence in several key economic cabinet posts. Moreover, the International Monetary Fund has just approved a $17.5 billion, four-year program that will provide an essential financial lifeline. The I.M.F. deserves credit for boldness; this is a rare case in which the agency has lent financial support during an ongoing conflict.
You are free to post from any source, including NYT. I just think the claim of "free and fair general election" above is utter trash from New York Trash.
No reform is more important than removing the distorting energy subsidies that have fueled corruption and dependence on Russia.
Well, people who are used to subsidies will be hostile to anything that takes subsidies away. It will only breed resentment against the west, and make people think about the glory days of the Soviet Union.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Hello @IBSA, I see you lurking around and reading this thread. Why don't you say a few things as well? Don't let our passionate skirmishing scare you away. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AVERAGE INDIAN

EXORCIST
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
3,330
Likes
5,416
Country flag
You are free to post from any source, including NYT. I just think the claim of "free and fair general election" above is utter trash from New York Trash.

Well, people who are used to subsidies will be hostile to anything that takes subsidies away. It will only breed resentment against the west, and make people think about the glory days of the Soviet Union.
your right bro the article criticizes Russia in hidden context which not valid in most of the scenarios but also raise few valid points on current situation of Ukraine so just posted it as mixed article
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
"free and fair" is an alien concept to Ukrainians. I think no election in Ukraine can be free and fair.
However there is weight to Western argument also as significant number of people want to join EU. However significant number of people disagree as well.

I think the idea of forced regime change was bad which exposed Western intentions and scared Russian elite. The doomsday scenarios are activated in Russia.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
@jouni
This is a EU discussion on 11/MAR/2015. that too coming from a British delegate, while Finland is eager to Finnish itself!


Nigel Farage mentions poking the "bear," because he looks like the "bear," err, I mean Medvedev:


Medved (Медведь) means bear, but this word is a close relative of two Sanskrit words.

med (мед)honeyhoney (मधु)
ved (ведь, вѣ́дѣніе)knowledgeved (वेद)

Our vedas are also named so because they are books of knowledge.

So, medved is one who has knowledge of honey, and that is another name for bear.

Anyway, enjoy this video about a medved, a real one this time, who is friends with a man:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
@jouni
This is a EU discussion on 11/MAR/2015. that too coming from a British delegate, while Finnish are eager to Finnish themselves!

As always, brits need Russian money in the City and will fight for the last European.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AVERAGE INDIAN

EXORCIST
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
3,330
Likes
5,416
Country flag
FINNISH Politicians, govt divided over EU joint army proposal

Finnish politicians have different opinions about the idea of a joint EU military force proposed by Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, media reported.

President Sauli Niinistö and Defense Minister Carl Haglund expressed their support of the proposal.

Talking to News Agency STT, Niinistö said that it would be good for Finland to support the idea given by the European Commission president describing the proposal as very interesting.

The European Union is founded upon peace which is a key value, and it is strange that there is no support behind to provide assurance, said Niinistö

Niinistö said as the president he has been consistent in advocating this kind of idea. The Finnish president, however, said he had not heard about the proposal before it became public.

"It would be good for Finland to support this. It would be a serious and genuine expression for the EU to defend its values," said Niinistö.

Haglund told Finnish national broadcaster Yle that Juncker's idea is interesting and worth discussing.

However, he pointed out that the joint army will not take the place of NATO, as most EU countries regard NATO as the primary alliance for defense cooperation.

On the other hand, some other Finnish politicians seem not keen on Juncker's proposal.

Prime Minister Alexander Stubb has termed the idea of a common European Union army as not realistic.

However, the premier on his part supports the defence cooperation in the European Union.

"Finland through its stint as a member of the EU has supported the strengthening of the EU's foreign and security policy, and also the crisis in Ukraine has shown its need," Stubb told news agency STT.

Stubb pointed out that the idea proposed by European Commission president Jean-Claude is not similar to the kind of thoughts which have been suggested in the past.

"I have sympathy towards this kind of ideas, but so far, they have not received widespread support among the EU member states.

Timo Soini, Chairman of the Finns Party said he does not believe the EU could build a joint defense force, as the EU should be more of an economic and free trade alliance.

Erkki Tuomioja, Finnish Minister of Foreign Affairs, claimed that the idea is not realistic, saying that the EU is "not capable" of developing a joint military force. He added that the proposed joint army is a long term goal but not a matter on timetable in the near future.


Juncker suggested on Sunday that the European Union needs to establish a joint army to face up to Russia and other threats coming from the rest of the world.

The proposal has been backed by Germany. Some other EU countries including France and the UK are worried that the proposed joint EU army would diminish NATO's influence over Europe.
- See more at: Politicians, govt divided over EU joint army proposal | national | Finland Times
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
In my opinion, if the EU wants to be economically independent and sovereign, it must be able to protect its interests, and for that, a military is necessary. If it outsources its security to the US, then it will also surrender its sovereignty to the US.

There is no charity. No country does anything out of benevolence. There is always self interest at play.
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
In my opinion, if the EU wants to be economically independent and sovereign, it must be able to protect its interests, and for that, a military is necessary. If it outsources its security to the US, then it will also surrender its sovereignty to the US.

There is no charity. No country does anything out of benevolence. There is always self interest at play.
Don't you understand the special relationship between EU and US. US was founded by Europeans. 300000 Finns moved there hundred years ago. There are millions who have Finnish roots now. Ok, you are still angry that Columbus missed India and landed there instead.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Don't you understand the special relationship between EU and US. US was founded by Europeans. 300000 Finns moved there hundred years ago. There are millions who have Finnish roots now. Ok, you are still angry that Columbus missed India and landed there instead.
No, I don't understand what you imply by this special relationship, real or imagined.

This is a defence forum, and if we are going to discuss wars, it is very important, in my opinion, to understand the intimate relationship between wars and finance. You should try to understand one of the major causes behind the American Revolutionary War which led to the Independence of the United States from the British rule. Once you do that, we may discuss whatever "special relationship between EU and US" you want to discuss.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
Don't you understand the special relationship between EU and US. US was founded by Europeans. 300000 Finns moved there hundred years ago. There are millions who have Finnish roots now. Ok, you are still angry that Columbus missed India and landed there instead.
There are millions of Chinese in USA. Hope they start a movement to annex USA to China.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top