, again,

Ukraine still isn't a member of NATO, like Putin demands.

And it now seems off the table anyway — Putin's demand met. ✓ No Ukraine NATO membership.

, the Nazi thing wasn't in Putin's demands (other than used as a pretext/excuse perhaps). Either way, UN peacekeepers ain't up to him to decide, as he apparently thinks, only to go in with his bombs blazing instead.

By intensity of hatred, nations create in themselves the characters they imagine in their enemies. Hence it is that all passionate conflicts result in the interchange of characteristics. — George William Russell

Don't become what you hate. — Akiroq Brost

Concessions given. Time for Putin to stand down, or at least chill out and head to the talking table? One could hope.

Concessions given. Time for Putin to stand down, or at least chill out and head to the talking table? One could hope. — jorndoe

Chilling out for Putin likely means resupplying and rearming his forces. He'll likely at least push for the land corridor to Crimea, so Mariupol has to give. Kyiv? Now that swift regime change is out of the question, perhpas just to bomb it to rubble. As a "negotiating tactic". Kyiv has many of those high rise apartment buildings, so it will likely be in the end just as devastated like the some European city after WW2.

They haven't called in reservists yet (by law, that can only be done in wartime, but then again, "law" is a very flexible thing in Russia), but they are actively recruiting. People are being called up under any pretext and asked to sign a contract. And of course, the infamous Wagner, a mercenary company with close ties to Russian military, are recruiting. They sent messages to all those who had previously applied but were rejected due to a criminal record or for other reasons, telling them that now there is no filter - anyone willing can go and taste salo in Ukraine (salt pork, colloquially known as a staple Ukrainian delicacy).

They haven't called in reservists yet (by law, that can only be done in wartime, but then again, "law" is a very flexible thing in Russia), but they are actively recruiting. People are being called up under any pretext and asked to sign a contract. — SophistiCat

Yes, this seemed to me extremely likely that they'll just make reservists "full time" and so avoid calling conscripts (who don't want to go) as much as possible.

This may also explain why Putin has put so much effort into arguing Ukraine is already part of Russia, in case they need conscripts they can argue their defending Russian soil.

Russian army reserve is not like US army reserve - it is not just a branch of the military that you can join for a few years of service. In Russia every man who is qualified for military service is either on active duty or in reserve - up to the age of about 50. So imagine all those men with families, jobs and beer bellies being called up to fight in the "brotherly" nation of Ukraine!

Russian Ground Forces consist of only 280 000 troops.
— ssu

That's the number of active duty troops as of 2020 per Wikipedia, but that would include both conscripts and professionals (Russia has both). — SophistiCat

I have done a bit of digging into the numbers, all of which seem to come from US intelligence estimates and refer to troops "in and around" Ukraine, which includes the bases around Ukraine.

For me, these figures represented total personnel of front line soldiers and support personnel.

However, the basic point that however many troops in Ukraine at any given point, it's easy for Russia to rotate troops out of combat for rest and recovery, whereas very difficult for Ukraine will remain true even if 100% of Russia's troops were committed to the war (they would still rotate some percentage at a time for recovery).

The following video also gives a lot of context:



The critical part for understanding Russia's overall doctrine (at least what they are trying to do) is the explanation of the basic organisation of brigade and division.

Basically, they have a divisions that are meant for large scale offensives and permanent defensive positions (i.e. the division, if things go well, can supply itself indefinitely in the field), and then they have smaller brigades that are smaller and mobile with limited sustainability in the field.

(According to the analysts at least) the Russians do not believe in long defensive lines, but rather manoeuvre based warfare including a lot of tactical retreat to inflict losses and then rapidly retake the area in question.

So, however "good" things are going for Russia in terms of absolute losses and relative losses vis-a-vis Ukraine, it makes a lot more sense to me at least what the Russian's basic idea is.

They have "divisions" setup around Kiev and in the south to protect core strategic objectives (Kherson to cross the Dnieper, land-bridge to Crimea, and of course encircling Kiev). Everything else is consistent with this manoeuvre based warfare of brigades that have limited sustainability, so might break through create a salient and then retreat. The sign of a "failed salient" is encirclement of forward forces.

Another interesting part of the video is describing the toppest-top level strategic thinking (again according to them) of the Russian military, which is their belief that any large scale conflict will involve a first phase of basically lot's of missiles and quick strikes at key strategic objectives (and giant air war; but that would apply more to a large air-power such as NATO) and then after that chaotic phase, a second phase of more prolonged warfare, where it is the side that adapts best that will prevail.

So, it definitely appears to me that this doctrine has been put into practice; it's of course up for debate how well it has worked and extremely difficult to evaluate based almost solely on information Ukraine side chooses to public.

Russian army reserve is not like US army reserve - it is not just a branch of the military that you can join for a few years of service. — SophistiCat

I am aware of this, I mean they will first try to recruit conscripts as full time regular soldiers voluntarily, as you describe, before conscripting people (i.e. force people who do not want to volunteer). The conscripts we've heard about so far were active duty conscripts that were thrown in to the war. Active duty conscripts train in the context of regular forces and bases (there's no separate base just for conscripts), as it's regular full time soldiers and officers that train the conscripts but also the regular forces train to deploy and manage conscripts in war games.

So, to use conscripts without calling it conscription, you just need to hire them as full time soldiers. For the active duty conscripts that got sent in with regular forces, I guess Kremlin is calling this an "error"--but of course it's purely just a PR thing, no one's "suing" the Kremlin over it.

Of course, there's a limit to how many people want to volunteer, but they'll certainly exhaust the voluntary recruits first. And by voluntary in this context, I mean someone wanting to join regular forces, not "volunteers" as has been labeled foreign fighters (by both sides).

In Russia every man who is qualified for military service is either on active duty or in reserve - up to the age of about 50. So imagine all those men with families, jobs and beer bellies being called up to fight in the "brotherly" nation of Ukraine! — SophistiCat

Definitely if they need to start forced conscription, this would be a sign of strategic troubles.

However, a military recruiting like mad during a war is not unusual, US marines are recruiting all the time.

Should also be kept in mind by everyone that conventional warfare produces a lot and a lot of casualties on a very wide spectrum of injuries. During my own training I was several times inured / exhausted to a point of 0 combat effectiveness, but then recovered in a week or two after a doctors note; and this was just training and more or less "sports injuries" without anyone actually shooting anything at me. So in a real war you're going to have all these "sports injuries" and limits of exhaustion, likely a lot more, in addition to shrapnel and bullet wounds and psychological limits as well. The stress of just training for war has a big effect, and there's basically zero trauma of anyone dying or actually trying to kill you.

So, all this affects the Russians, but so too the Ukrainians, and pauses are not just to resupply and buildup forward operating bases, they are also to wear down the enemy psychologically, physically, allow small wounds to get infected etc.

And being able to rotate out troops to infirmaries in Russia, even for small wounds or psychological recovery, is an immense strategic advantage. Soldiers that do "break" you want to immediately send somewhere far away so it doesn't take time of effective troops to manage and affect their morale.

And people break all the time just training for conventional warfare, so, I can only really imagine what a real conventional war is like.

One guy on our base broke his foot with a chair, to get out of the experience. This other guy (far more intelligent) just refused to speak nor do anything other than eat and go the bathroom, he'd just lie in bed, and progressively higher ranked officers would come and yell at him--even the commander of the entire base, so the legend goes--until they finally let him go do civilian service after two weeks (once the army "has you" they won't let you go easily, if they believe you can actually fight--of which they prefer your opinion on the matter not to count).

And, the motivation to break people down (especially in basic training) is extremely high, as from the officer's point of view the people that break are not only not-effective soldiers and just a combat liability ... but are somewhat likely to shoot you if you give them a riffle and bullets. But these are still just simulations that don't even get remotely close to the psychological pressures of a real war.

For what it's worth, the Ukrainian side estimates that the Russians will have exhausted their stock of cannon fodder by end April - early May.

With any luck, Ukraine can save part of their wheat harvest, that should take place in June I think. If the conflict last longer, the harvest will be compromised, with significant repercussions on food prices and possibly famines in a number of food-importing countries.

Trotsky, the native Ukrainian, knew what's up, long before any of this went down:

Only hopeless pacifist blockheads are capable of thinking that the emancipation and unification of the Ukraine can be achieved by peaceful diplomatic means, by referendums, by decisions of the League of Nations, etc. In no way superior to them of course are those “nationalists” who propose to solve the Ukrainian question by entering the service of one imperialism against another. Hitler gave an invaluable lesson to those adventurers by tossing (for how long?) Carpatho-Ukraine to the Hungarians who immediately slaughtered not a few trusting Ukrainians. Insofar as the issue depends upon the military strength of the imperialist states, the victory of one grouping or another can signify only a new dismemberment and a still more brutal subjugation of the Ukrainian people, The program of independence for the Ukraine in the epoch of imperialism is directly and indissolubly bound up with the program of the proletarian revolution. It would be criminal to entertain any illusions on this score.

...The impending war will create a favorable atmosphere for all sorts of adventurers, miracle-hunters and seekers of the golden fleece. These gentlemen, who especially love to warm their hands in the vicinity of the national question, must not be allowed within artillery range of the labor movement. Not the slightest compromise with imperialism, either fascist or democratic!

https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/04/ukraine.html

If the West was in any way sincere about it's faux-concern about Ukraine - and it doesn't give a shit, let's be clear - the one lesson you'd think it would learn is not to put it's energy eggs in a tyranny-basket. But of course, the West, as usual, being built on nothing but a growing pile of broken, bloody bodies, simply swaps one murderous shitstain for another set of murderous shitstains:

Boris Johnson is hoping to line up major Saudi investment in British renewable energy on a visit to Riyadh on Wednesday, during which he will urge the desert kingdom to increase oil production to tackle market volatility. But ahead of the trip the UK prime minister was accused by Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer of going “cap in hand from dictator to dictator” to beg for help, arguing that Johnson should have put in place a more balanced energy strategy years ago.

Johnson will fly to the Middle East overnight on Tuesday for talks in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in an attempt to convince the two countries to help boost energy supplies and stabilise markets disrupted by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The UK announced last week that it would phase out Russian oil imports by the end of the year.

https://www.ft.com/content/b60387ea-d3f4-4819-aa53-77e86e4d5094

Russian prosecutors on Tuesday called for jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny to serve 13 years in prison on new fraud charges.

Navalny, President Putin’s most vocal domestic critic, was jailed last year after surviving a poison attack he blames on the Kremlin.

He now faces embezzlement and contempt of court charges and has been put on trial at the prison colony outside Moscow where he is already serving a 2.5 year sentence.

“I request that Navalny be sentenced to a term of 13 years and a subsequent two years of probation,” the prosecutor, Nadezhda Tikhonova, was quoted as saying by Russian news agencies.

The prosecutor asked for Navalny to be sent to a “strict regime” penal colony, which would place him in much harsher conditions with cellmates who are repeat offenders.

The prosecutor also called for him to pay a fine of 1.2m rubles ($£8,685.).

“You can’t put everyone in prison. Even if you ask for 113 years, you won’t scare me or others like me,” Navalny said in court.

A better President of Russia? I am not sure. In any case, his views are relevant here:

You can read the entire article in context.

In early 2012, Navalny stated on Ukrainian TV, "Russian foreign policy should be maximally directed at integration with Ukraine and Belarus… In fact, we are one nation. We should enhance integration". During the same broadcast Navalny said "No one wants to make an attempt to limit Ukraine's sovereignty".[403][404]

In October 2014, Navalny said in an interview that despite Crimea being illegally "seized", "the reality is that Crimea is now part of Russia". When asked if he would return Crimea to Ukraine if he became president, he said "Is Crimea some sort of sausage sandwich to be passed back and forth? I don't think so"

In Ukraine now, there are no politicians who do not have extreme anti-Russian positions. Being anti-Russian is the key to success now in Ukraine, and that is our fault". — Wikipedia

↪boethius For what it's worth, the Ukrainian side estimates that the Russians will have exhausted their stock of cannon fodder by end April - early May.

With any luck, Ukraine can save part of their wheat harvest, that should take place in June I think. If the conflict last longer, the harvest will be compromised, with significant repercussions on food prices and possibly famines in a number of food-importing countries. — Olivier5

Even if true about the cannon fodder, which is certainly difficult for us to know, is this leverage Ukraine has on Russia, or leverage Russia has on Ukraine and the entire world?

Thanks for these insights, always pause for thought someone describing something happening today ... about a century ago.

Reminds me of a passage from Marx about how the "liberal" party of UK, whatever it was called at the time, just represents the aristocrats and their fellow rich friends that benefit from economic liberalisation and getting rid of the rest of aristocratic privileges, and they'll never deliver on their "ideals" of freedom and equality and the rest of it; that it's all talk and you'll never see actions no matter their majority in parliament ... it will always be close but "shucks, can't do it".

Even if true about the cannon fodder, which is certainly difficult for us to know, is this leverage Ukraine has on Russia, or leverage Russia has on Ukraine and the entire world? — boethius

As always, the same info can mean many different thing to different people. For Ukraine, it means that their goal ought to be to perdure and keep Kyiv in particular for another 6 weeks or so. Pressure will ease after that and might even inverse, with Ukrainians able to take back territory. But 6 weeks is a long time, so they need to pace themselves.

For the Russians it means they need to come to a decisive victory no later than end of April, otherwise they will emerge as losers. Time is not on their side.

For the rest of the world, I think one important take-away point is that it is too early to write off the Ukrainian wheat harvest.

Completely agree.

However, Russia is also currently holding the world's food hostage. This is going to create a log of diplomatic pressure from all sorts of countries on NATO to resolve the crisis.

On-top of the Ukraine-Russian military struggle, there's also this battle of wills. Russia is hurting from the sanctions ... but the whole world is hurting from the sanctions as well as commodity price increases. At some point, various "neutral" governments, that NATO still "needs" to deal with for various reasons, are simply not going to care who wins or loses the fight ... only that their people are gong to be able to eat.

What we can be sure of is that the whole situation is tense.

↪boethius, the Nazi thing wasn't in Putin's demands (other than used as a pretext/excuse perhaps). Either way, UN peacekeepers ain't up to him to decide, as he apparently thinks, only to go in with his bombs blazing instead. — jorndoe

Legitimate grievances are rarely directly addressed in a resolution, rather compensation is represented in some way to make the deal acceptable.

For example, if a company screws up, they may offer you a gift card to "resolve the issue", they won't commit to writing that they accept whatever the grievance is has any legitimacy; it's their offer that represents that and their proposal to solve it.

Russia knows that the Ukraine and NATO will never admit to a neo-Nazi problem, so there's no use in negotiating that directly. Most leverage in a negotiation is implied. Someone much bigger and stronger than you shouldn't need to actually point that out if "you're in their seat".

only that their people are gong to be able to eat. — boethius

If the Ukrainians cannot harvest their wheat, international cereal prices will go through the roof, unsettling governments the world over.

Completely agreed, and those governments will therefore soon want the conflict to be resolved one way or another.

The party (that they can influence) that can most easily end the conflict is NATO, by stopping the supply of weapons (or just negotiate behind the scenes, and then telling Zelensky to accept the deal or the arms supplies ... well, aren't necessary going to stop but, it would be a damn shame if anything were to happen to them once in Ukraine--there's a nice supply line of ATGM's here, I wouldn't want to see anything to happen to it, capiche, kind of remark).

This entire process is Zelenski and the West calling Russia's bluff, and now Russia calling the West's bluff.

Who's actually bluffing ... we'll find out soon enough.

those governments will therefore soon want the conflict to be resolved one way or another.

The party that can most easily end the conflict is NATO, — boethius

Nope, it's Russia. NATO can do shit. And honestly, governments of food importing countries have very little political leverage because they are poor, aid-dependent countries. They are not going to pressure Russia to stop the war.

What will happen -- in the hypothesis of a long war affecting global food trade -- is the opposite, likely: food or hunger will be used as a weapon. How is that done? The Russians will try to famish people in Ukraine, for one. For two, use food aid as a diplomatic tool. So Russia may buy some political support by sending free food to some countries, while the EU and US do the same with other countries, in a clientelist fashion.

Reminds me of a passage from Marx about how the "liberal" party of UK, whatever it was called at the time, just represents the aristocrats and their fellow rich friends that benefit from economic liberalisation and getting rid of the rest of aristocratic privileges, and they'll never deliver on their "ideals" of freedom and equality and the rest of it; that it's all talk and you'll never see actions no matter their majority in parliament ... it will always be close but "shucks, can't do it". — boethius

He was right. He remains right.

On a related note, it's been fun to see the world's largest room of war criminals condemn Putin, the war criminal, of daring to be their equal: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-senate-unanimously-condemns-putin-war-criminal-2022-03-15/

No doubt many of them will whine about Navalny while they wait with baited breath for Assange to be dropped on their doorstep by the British, all while crying about free speech and Putin's tyranny.

So they're hypocrites. I'd rather that than have them be silent about Putin's crimes (like some people I know).

Yeah, the world is really in danger of not talking about Putin's crimes. Just a hair's breadth away from that untenable situation.

Yeah, the world is really in danger of not talking about Putin's crimes. Just a hair's breadth away from that untenable situation. — StreetlightX

I prefer to hear it. It honors the victims (for me, anyway). The ones who are silent spit on their graves (basically).

Maybe get a better hobby? Have you tried Elden Ring?

Maybe get a better hobby? Have you tried Elden Ring? — StreetlightX

I haven't. But then, I'm not glued to Twitter as you seem to be. I'm making a fence out of painted shapes. It's supposed to look like a giant lichen. That's my hobby.

That's nice for you :)

Russia's state TV has been hit by a stream of high-profile resignations.

Some of the posters here should send their CV to RT and co, assuming they aren't working for Moscow already.... If you must help murderers spread their lies, you might as well get paid for it.