Holien

For those that don't check the BBC news an interesting article on how Ukraine is tackling corruption. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq55rpqlp31o
Every country is corrupt in someway, what matters is how the leadership and institutions try and stop it from bleeding the country dry.
Funny what excuses some folk come up with to stop supporting Ukraine.  🙄 
Lot's left to do and really a never ending job.
 

I think this list contains 2 points which were major contributors not only to the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, but to the Soviet state collapse in general.
The first one is the economic situation, which is kind of obvious. Soviet economy peaked in 1950s when it looked like SU can give the Free World economies a run for their money, but then it could not and started failing. There is however one potentially pertinent point: AFAIK the Soviet economy got a large boost in 1970s when the Middle East fuel crisis made fuel prices soar and Russian oil &gas exports actually became the Soviet economy, the rest paling into insignificance. During the 1980s a high price for oil became the make or break factor for the Soviet economic results, and their ability to support their budgets, and it is so today for the Putinist Russia. End of 80's is increased stabilisation in the Middle East, increased US  political influence among the oil producing countries, increased US domestic oil production, which creates the perspective of fuel prices going down and staying low for a long time. At that, Soviet economy tanked to the bottom & the rest we know. This makes me wonder, if at the beginning of the 2022 invasion there was a way to repeat this successful formula and wage the economic warfare against RUS in a more effective way which would already be giving significant results.  In the actual scenario, the Western counries tried to decrease their imports of oil and shrink the demand for RUS exports that way. That makes sense, however mostly in the long run. I am wondering about doing the opposite and increasing supply. Unfortunately, the Biden administration at the time was acting strongly against the oil economy, thus creating the opposite trend to the 1980's trend discussed above: conflict with Middle Eastern oil producers, ban on increasing the domestic production. I am wondering, if adopting a more flexible approach re this could have worked better. Temporarily increasing supply and driving the oil price down below the levels profitable for Russians would make them spend their reserves quicker and then force them to adopt war economy measures which are very damaging to the general economic power and potentially unpopular.
The second is less obvious. In Poland after the historians got at the post-communist archives it became quite apparent, that the commies were not particularly concerned about the hearts and minds of "the working folk of the cities and countryside", as they had been officially referred to. They were  procedures for when the proles mutiny.  What really became a problem, is that the members of the political and security apparatus themselves started to be sympathetic to the regime change. The fact, that they were the kings of the communist world and much better than the rest of the society stopped mattering as much as the fact, that in absolute terms, the colonels of militia and chairmen of local party organisations were worse off than even the lower strata of the societies in the West.  The nail in the coffin were the results of the 1989 elections (which had been intended by the commies to be just a tactical retreat and the Polish United Workers Party had very much been intended to remain the dominant political power) except not as much in general, but in the "special voting circuits" - in military and militia garrisoned units, among prison guards, etc. The opposition won even there. The obvious conclusion was that the threat of using military force as the communists BATNA became void, soldiers would not fight for them, so the gig was up. With regard to the present situation in the Ukraine war, the parallel is that it is perhaps not necessary to change the heart of the ordinary Russian on the street. But finding a way to turn the low-and middle management of the Russian state and power apparatus against Putin could be it. For the avoidance of doubt, the individual sanctions against top oligarchs will not work, too simplistic and too restricted, we are not talking about turning a few selected people against Putin, but a whole group. I actually have no idea how to achieve this.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

Ukraine just has to keep fighting with support from the West...
There is no magic shortcut.
If Ukraine wants to defeat Russia they just have to keep killing Russians and destroying oil refineries.
Russia has lost they just need to accept this...

IIRC: A change of Premier. Chernenko died. Gorbachev got in. Gorby wasn't keen on the war.

There were social and economic factors, like @A Canadian Cat mentions, but in a state where the repression dial goes up to 11 it's hard to see how they could be decisive.
That certainly seems to be what we're seeing today: Putin doesn't seem to care about casualties, economic damage or the potential for social unrest. Russia will pull out of Ukraine when whoever's in the Kremlin decides to and it's really not clear how Ukraine and the West can exert pressure to force that decision.

My understanding was it was $ and upset citizens (especially mothers of casualties). 
On the subject of $ back then, like now, the war cost a lot and it was effecting people's standard of living which they didn't like. But unlike now there was no "deal" with citizens to improve their standard of living so it wasn't as serious an issue back then.
On the subject of upset citizens, there were protest groups protesting the loss of their loved ones. This was tolerated since it wasn't viewed as direct challenge to the authority of the Kremlin. It got out of hand especially combined with the previous issue. Or there was a concern in the Kremlin it could get out of hand. Since they didn't view the Afghanistan conflict as existential they could pull back. Note they kept control of key parts of the country for a while after the pull out. The Najibullah government lasted for several years without the issues of the Soviet occupation.
Putin could be facing the same pressures except he learned from the Afghan war and the fall of the Soviet Union. All protests are a direct challenge to his authority, period. He has been dealing with all protest harshly from the beginning. He also realized that if the people don't know the truth then they cannot complain about it. Hence his work from the start to take the old Soviet "you cannot trust any source as correct" propaganda method but dialed up to 11 and combined with just covering up the number of casualties.
Back in the Afghan war the "loss" of the war was not existential to the Kremlin - they started it to quell Islamic unrest. While the loss itself seemed bad they really maintained control for a long time after they pulled out through their usual proxy arrangement so it didn't seem so important compared to the cost any more.
Whereas this current war is existential to Putin since he made it that way when he started.
That's the Cole's notes from memory.
My take away is that Putin learned the lessons of that part of history well and applied them here.

A historical question. What prompted Russia to withdraw from Afghanistan, and can we draw any conclusions from it in regard to the future of Ukraine? How is it similar? How is it dissimilar? We've had plenty of similar debates circling around why the US withdrew from (Vietnam, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, etc etc etc).

"The Putin regime may not seem weak on the surface, but its stability is a mirage produced by the repression it exerts."
 
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/theory-victory-ukraine

Russia Arrests Top Commander Who Slammed Putin's Military (msn.com)
A senior Russian commander who criticized the Russian military and its treatment of soldiers operating in southern Ukraine has been arrested, Russian state media reported on Tuesday.
Major General Ivan Popov, who had headed Russia's 58th Army, was "arrested on suspicion of fraud," Russian state news agency, Tass, reported, citing a law enforcement spokesperson.
Popov was removed from his command of Russian troops in Ukraine's annexed southern Zaporizhzhia region In July 2023 after he criticized the Russian Defense Ministry for failing to provide sufficient support for the country's fighters.
Popov condemned what he called a "lack of counter-battery combat," too few resources to scout for artillery and the "mass deaths" of Russian soldiers.
In a recording published to social media by Russian MP and former military commander Andrei Gurulyov, Popov—appearing to be addressing his troops—said he had "raised a number of other problems" to the top of Russia's military command, and was dismissed by then-Defense Minister, Sergei Shoigu.
"The senior chiefs apparently sensed some kind of danger from me," Popov said.

https://mastodon.social/@ChrisO_wiki/112472540071030065
Kind of to be expected that especially members of security / police etc. Are going to the war in Ukraine and dying there. These are missing inside Russia now. 

This night UKR drones has struck oil base in Vyborg close to Finnish border...

... Oil refinery in Slaviansk-on-Kuban' - reportedly refinery is temporary halted.
Six UAVs have fell down on Slaviansk-on-Kuban' oil refinery territory, prliminary no victims and destructions - the head of district
Slaviansk-on-Kuban' temporary halted work after falling of UAVs - the [Slaviansk ECO] company 


... And large military airbase Kushchovskaya in Krasnodar region. On the TG screen locals report about explosions in the direction of airfield. Maybe satellite photos will appear soon

And that alas has worked with the BBC and MSM reporting Ukraine is on the ropes and struggling.
The simple headlines are being picked up and amplified to the masses who don't have time, or the understanding to assess what is actually happening.

And that alas has worked with the BBC and MSM reporting Ukraine is on the ropes and struggling.
The simple headlines are being picked up and amplified to the masses who don't have time, or the understanding to assess what is actually happening.

I think the Russians are pulling a 'Russian rebels' move on the Ukraine border. Doing to Ukraine what the Russian rebel fighters are doing to them. Make a limited incursion across the border more as a propaganda move than anything else, Watch your opponent scurrying around trying to counter it, embarrassing the enemy. Any actual strategic importance? Not much, probably.

Mass. The UA had been using small dispersed forces in its tactical bitings last summer. The RA has been using small Cbt teams as short sharp stabs. (and paying for it).  From what we can see this was a large dismounted wave with some mech elements.  Numbers of 50k have been thrown around.  The aim was not infiltration-to-erode, it was to take and hold ground with what looks like unit sized dismounted troops.  That is a different kettle of dead Russians.

No. It will not lead to the eventual end of international law. International law might come to an end eventually, but it will not be because we stayed high. If anything, it might come to an end because we went low.
I think you are missing some very basic fundamentals about this war, the relative strength of modern day Russia and the west, how the modern world works in general, and a few realities of warfare.
1. It isn't about going high or low. Russia is making gains in Ukraine right now because there was a gap in western aid, not because the west is sticking to the high road. Now that fresh aid is on the way Russia's window to make significant gains is going to come to a close, even if they keep going low. It will not reopen unless there is another gap in western aid. It has absolutely nothing to do with going high or low. Russia going low is not giving them an advantage on the battlefield, the gap in western aid is. Us going high is not putting Ukraine at a disadvantage on the battlefield, the gap in western aid is.
2. The west is massively more powerful than Russia. The US GDP in 2022 was ten times the Russian GDP. The combined members of NATO (including the US) have twenty times the Russian GDP. If you add in our Pacific and Asian allies it comes out to thirty times the Russian GDP. Now, as we have been painfully learning over the last two years, overwhelming economic superiority does not instantly or automatically translate to a superiority in military industrial production. But, as I expect Russia to very painfully learn over the next (I'm throwing out a guess here, based largely on the mediocrity principle, that we're right smack dab in the middle of this thing) two years, it does translate to a greater potential to expand military industrial production. And it translates to greater economic endurance. Russia cannot keep up current levels of spending forever. The west can keep up current levels of aid to Ukraine (or even many times the current levels of aid in monetary terms) pretty much forever. So the west absolutely has the capability to enable Ukraine to win. The only factor is western will to continue supporting Ukraine, and to hopefully expand support for Ukraine. Provided that western will to support Ukraine doesn't break, it is impossible for Russia to win even if they go low and we stay high. Going low or high isn't even a factor.
3. Going high isn't just about principle, it's where our strength comes from. I mean that literally, not in the vague feel-good sense in which the power of love somehow enables the heroes of a story to overcome impossible odds. Our strength (both military and economic) is literally derived from our alliances, our credibility, and the rules based international order. The United States has a massive network of alliances. You may notice that China and Russia, both of which are far more willing to go low, come up a little short on allies.
4. Going low doesn't actually work. This may be a bit difficult to grasp, particularly since we've been inundated with pessimists who think they're realists for so many years. But just because something is dirty or unethical doesn't make it effective. As one example, Russian assassinations on British soil were probably a factor in why the British have been so enthusiastic in providing support for Ukraine (the small amount of material they've provided has more to do with a lack of material to provide than with a lack of will to provide it). As another example, I have been reading about increasing use by the Russians of chemical weapons in Ukraine. These are outlawed in warfare under international law, so is about as clear a case of going low as you could imagine. But there are reasons why it was so much easier to outlaw the use of chemical weapons in warfare than it was to outlaw the use of, for example, cluster munitions. Chief among them is that cluster munitions are extremely effective, while chemical weapons aren't particularly effective. It was easy to outlaw chemical weapons because their cruelty is far out of proportion to their battlefield utility. They're better than nothing, but they're difficult to maintain and generally less effective than an equivalent amount of HE would have been. The fact that Russia has resorted to using chemical weapons is a sign of desperation, not a sign that these are actually effective weapons. So far I believe all of the recent Russian advances have been credited to artillery and local air superiority, not to their use of chemical weapons.

I wish them luck in arguing their case.

Seriously, this is a brutal war not a children's playground game. Russian commanders should not be able to stick their tongues out and say you can't catch me! Na-na-na-na! When they are rallying their troops inside Russia to commit more barbaric genocidal acts inside Ukraine.

It really seems like Russia is allowed to strike Ukrainian civilians daily, and we will still not let Ukrainians strike legit military targets inside Russia with some of the weapons that are provided. Ukraine has a full right to defend itself and strike military targets inside Russia according to the laws of war.

Hey according to Russia's own laws a large part of eastern and southern Ukraine is already sacred Russian land and we let Ukrainians hit those areas. Maybe it is time Putin finds out that annexing parts of Ukraine and making it "Russia", could be a double-edged sword here.

I wish to applaud the British and Finnish governments for already announcing that Ukrainians are allowed to use the weapons they provided to strike targets inside Russia, I hope the folks in Washington will do the same soon.

The head of the foreign intelligence service tells a popular TV channel that his country is running out of military reserves😆. I hope you understand that this message does not mean that Ukraine is really running out of reserves. This is more of a message to the allies - it’s very difficult for us now, we need more help. Budanov is a media person, but don't expect him to tell you the real state of the Ukrainian armed forces

Oh dear Ukraine is doomed Kharkiv is about to fall...
Let's look at recent past history.
Has Russia been able to mount an attack that has taken and held any sizeable amount of territory in the last year?
Has anything changed that will mean they can?
Has Ukraine annoyed the Kremlin by launching attacks across the border?
Has the Kremlin issued orders to say stop those annoying attacks on our territory?
Has Russia launched attacks on this area before especially if as you say it is so exposed to Russia?
If it was an easy place to attack why has Russia not done so in the last year?
As for your "No clear picture of what's in the city or how it's defended" are you for real? Why would we know, why would you know?
But hey let's look at recent past history...
Has Ukraine been able to make decent defensive positions?
Did they know the attack was coming? Yes they did...
So I would counter your usual doom and gloom with Ukraine will be able to handle it.
Of course I could be wrong but I am happy to bet a stack of donuts on my view that they will handle it.
Russia might be able to create a buffer zone but that's about it. 
Why don't you ask some questions about if Russia can keep sustaining all their losses for sod all territorial gains...

One of the understated successes of the Biden administration is the commitment to restore chip manufacturing back in the U.S.

"President Biden announced a deal with Intel that will give the chipmaker up to $8.5 billion in grants and another $11 billion in loans to build semiconductor plants in four states — the biggest project to date in his push to bring chips manufacturing back to America."
Biden is giving Intel $8.5 billion for big semiconductor projects in 4 states

"The US government plans to give $6.6 billion to the world’s biggest manufacturer of semiconductor chips to help it build three factories in Arizona as part of President Joe Biden’s efforts to secure the supply of advanced chips."
Biden to give Taiwan’s TSMC $6.6 billion to ramp up US chip production
It'll take time for these facilities to be built and equipped. As well to train up a pool of skilled workers, but it is in the pipeline. Hopefully, we're in front of the curve and not trying to play catch up with a peer adversary.


 

This feels right to me. It conforms with what seems to be happening in Xi's China at a slower pace but as Russia is in a nose to nose Darwinian struggle to remain competitive (it thinks in global terms but realistically more as a local spoiler) it is lunging backwards to the older silovik elite's half remembered Soviet bet on war economy productivity. In that light, putting in a grey economist to run the MoD makes perfect sense.