kevinkin

I guess by default it's the CCP. But what a motley crew they have.

Or China might want to appear to be the "adult in the room" and make overtures toward talks. Meanwhile they their true motivations lie elsewhere. In the end, each side will have to claim victory even though the victory is pyric. Even a hint of CCP support must help Russian moral at this point. Does Biden's "continue to have Ukraine’s back" translate well into Mandarin? Increasingly, it looks like China won't let Russia collapse. That would be bad PR within the ant-west community.

REUTERS: Ukraine's Zelensky says he plans to meet China's Xi Zelensky on Friday welcomed some elements of a Chinese proposal for a ceasefire in Russia's war on Ukraine. I wonder what gifts they will exchange? Xi, a chunk of Russian coal; Zelensky a scale model of a M142 HIMARS?

Nice and concise: https://thediplomat.com/2023/02/as-russias-military-stumbles-in-ukraine-chinese-strategists-are-taking-notes/ the PLA is not looking at the Russian invasion of Ukraine through rose-colored glasses. They may indeed acknowledge that a hypothetical invasion of Taiwan would be far from easy. It could also involve extremely high personnel and equipment losses, not to mention a risk to the prestige that the Chinese armed forces now enjoy both at home, and to some extent, abroad. The most glaring critique, according to this Chinese military assessment, is that the Battalion Tactical Group combat units have not been adequate to the task at hand. The report notes, “Deficiencies of the Russian battalion-level tactical groups have been exposed, such as their lacking the ability to be self-sustaining in combat and that they are too weak to be effective. Perhaps with an eye to a potential conflict over Taiwan, the report calls the brigade unit “unable to effectively fight protracted and high-intensity conflicts of attrition.” The proposed reform is “to transform from a brigade back to a division system.” The Chinese analysis criticizes the Russian Air Force with having “executed too few sorties,” and says that “the effectiveness of precision strikes was inadequate and coordination with the army was limited.” It is suggested that Russia’s proposed remedy will be to assign “mixed aviation division and army aviation brigades” to each army group to improve “integrated air-ground operations.” The Russian Army is realizing the value in empowering the lowest levels of troops and commanders with ISR platforms to speed up target acquisition, reconnaissance, and attacks. Having already studied U.S. adoption of UAVs and drones, and with China’s massive domestic drone industry, this finding looks set to accelerate already the high level of drone use by PLA forces at all levels and within each of its service branches. Playing the Nuclear Card Notably, the article also pays close attention to Russia’s repeated nuclear warnings. The PLA analysis notes that while Russia lags in conventional military strength, it is relying on its nuclear deterrent to balance against the United States and NATO. Russia is identified as having pushed back against collective Western pressure by “conducting nuclear exercises, raising the level of nuclear force combat readiness, and warning that the third world war will be a nuclear war.” The article is actually not too rough on Russia. We all know Russia, and its systems, are rotten to the core and have to fight with that handicap. Maybe the analysis conveniently forgets that since China will fight with the same handicaps.

Yuck https://news.yahoo.com/russian-support-putin-war-ukraine-050033692.html “If the current political system remains with the existing leaders for another 10 years or so, that’s a full school cycle for indoctrination,” said Ekaterina Schulmann, a Russian political scientist now based in Berlin. “And not so much in patriotism and this expansionist nonsense but in hypocrisy and getting used to lies.” Perhaps the next cold war will not pit good vs evil, not free markets vs controlled economies, but winners vs losers. Losers of all kinds. Where ideology takes back seat to "if you can't beat em, keep trying until you do". Whack a mole on the global boardwalk. Well here is a move in no direction: In a debate at the UN general assembly marking the anniversary of the invasion and seen as a key barometer of the state of world opinion, China intervened to present itself as above the conflict by proposing a catalogue of measures: a ceasefire, dialogue, security guarantees for Russia, protection of civilians and the upholding of territorial integrity. The deputy Chinese envoy to the UN, Dai Bing, insisted the west was worsening the situation by arming Ukraine, saying: “Adding fuel to the fire will only exacerbate tensions”. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/23/germany-and-china-clash-over-wests-supply-of-weapons-to-ukraine More end game; new cold war stuff: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-and-when-the-war-in-ukraine-will-end/ar-AA17QYuc Different analogs like Korea/cease-fire mediated by actors like the United Nations, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates discussed. To put a twist on an old Yiddish expression, people predict, and war laughs. Bloomberg: How Biden’s Shock-and-Awe Tactic Is Failing to Stop Russia The economic punishment of Russia was touted as a game-changer. Instead it’s turned into a war of attrition — and a race against time. Yuck, time always gets in the way: the world grows tired while it's taking a year to field M1A1s. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2023/02/23/tanks-might-not-reach-ukraine-this-year-us-army-secretary-says/

This follows the trend in distributed operations. This started as a theory many years ago but has gained so much traction that now that potential island bases are being map out and the US is gaining formal permission to use them. https://www.marines.mil/Force-Design-2030/ Interesting that the HIMARS is a central part of the mobile fires piece including anti-ship with RORO using C-130s or landing craft. Here is an article that's close to home: https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/11/black-sea-drill-again-validates-himars-as-an-anti-ship-weapon-system/ There is so much written now on this operational concept that it's easy to find. There is software out that can sim all this and it's damn cool to set up. Especially with STOL F-35s hunting and relaying intel to the big boys carrying the AGM-158C LRASM. Still the ability of a modern warship to defend it self to these swarms is impressive. All in all, very expensive too.

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-2-23-23/h_22f64310e6c80ce8e0a0470ab42d5e7a Don't stay up all night for this one.

The CCP feels they are caring for their own. It's just a very narrow slice of the population labeled the chosen ones. The rest are just economic cannon fodder. Maybe China thinks the time is right, after year of observation, to give support to Russia. Why not get them addicted to the support and threaten to withdraw it a an opportune time.

Don't forget the CCP was born out of the same. Unless the West economically embargos China - no harm no foul. Maybe the CCP is jealous and wants a proxy to call their own. They can sit back and learn from the stresses the war places on the US and the west from top to bottom. The only sovereignty the CCP cares about is their own.

- and get approval from lawyers a half a world away on whether a military target risks too many civilian losses. You could only afford to do that in a expeditionary COIN war. If NATO were to enter on the ground in Ukraine fighting a continental war, those attorneys would have to find other work.

Or maybe it is the UA recommending possible strategies to NATO since they know the ground so intimately. NATO processes scenarios in light of intel and grand strategic political factors. Then I guess some agreement is made. In some ways this is not a proxy war since the proxy has so much influence on how the war is conducted. It's more of a partnership in the defeat of Russia. In biology; a symbiotic relationship.

Yes, without airpower developing cracks into which mission command can operate and then out Boyd cycle Russian leadership, troops might not find many opportunities on the ground to economically exploit. The UA would be sort guessing where to probe based on overhead intel. Better than in WW2. But they can't afford to bumble into the cul de sacs that could turn into kill zones. Of course this makes one think why upgrade UA armored formations if the air component is left on the ground? Well, they made do under less than ideal conditions before. And they are better off with the upgrades even if only for defensive measures right now.

They stole my CMBS map. Nice video.

A step towards more clandestine ops? https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/uh-60-black-hawk-unexpectedly-appears-in-ukrainian-military-service

Given South Korea has been in a state of war with the North since the 50's, they have probably accumulated enough bullets and shell and even higher tech stuff in part via their own manufacturing. But I can't be 100% sure. Would a conflict last a year given the role US/South Korean airpower would have? I don't know but that's a logistics test case and deserves a closer look for comparisons to Ukraine's readiness. It's as if the US has has more respect for North Korea's capabilities than Russia's. WSJ Headline: China’s Xi Jinping Plans Russia Visit as Putin Wages War in Ukraine Chinese leader is expected to use Moscow trip to push for multiparty peace talks

Russia. Let's see.

Saw a report just now the address went dark across the country due to a "hack": Breaking. "web links of main state channels which are part of All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company [VGTRK ] were taken down as he spoke."

You are right when it comes to a huge continental land war. However, this is the first in many years and NATO and US have fallen asleep using expeditionary warfare to project power. Ammo consumption and production was OK for that and we never seriously contemplated overstocking to arm Ukraine. I am not sure where else in the world such an expenditure of bullets and shells would take place over this length of time. Pretty sure the belt way will have countless AARs on this. If there ever is an after.

Both sides will put a wet finger to the wind and see how it's blowing in the Spring of 2024. This issue is like sailing: when one boat tacks, so does the other. That way they nullify each other and try to make the race over whatever national issues are hot at the time. Arguing over the amount of money for Ukraine will not drive people to the polls. All bets are off if US troops are on the ground. Then Americans might take notice and figure out where on earth the Ukraine actually is. What a potential candidate says so far out is just noise given how fickle they can be.

God forbid if we are voting on funding this war in November of 2024. What will be left of Ukraine at that point? Better if the US and Ukraine kick Russia out and the fighting stops on the west's terms now. An ongoing war is only a winner for some: https://www.grid.news/story/global/2023/02/20/the-unexpected-winners-of-the-war-in-ukraine-the-people-companies-and-countries-that-have-benefited-from-the-turmoil/ I can see voting on reconstruction support, but the war itself better be over. The administration will look pretty impotent after the POTUS's visit. The war would be a messy issue in 2024 and don't think any side would come out a clear winner in American politics. Dems = "not enough money" Reps = "it's and debt, stupid". Same old same old.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2023/02/17/ukrainian-battalion-completes-first-combined-arms-training-in-germany/?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d Bradley battalion went first and now a Stryker is up. Not at a critical training mass yet. But a start. I wonder if the US will figure out how to fly drones from a FIST: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-to-get-bradley-m7-vehicles-to-act-as-artillery-quarterbacks The land aircraft carrier we talked about over the summer.

Was about to post a link, so just a comment: It wasn't too long ago chatter at the water cooler was China would never back a loser like Putin. China is too smart for that. These reports requires more attention. The devil is in the details. We know what the West wants out of all this. But what about China? I think China is acting up now as a counterbalance because they see the West slowly introducing modern systems. Russia might fail, but on China's terms and in no way will they allow western democratic forces to emerge in Russia. In China's mindset, negotiations are long over due. So lethal support might just be a way to encourage talks. Russian is a PIA asset for China now. And maybe they want to make Russia less of a PIA and more of an asset.

Russian AFV passes a trench without overwatch. It takes time to dig in like that. So maybe they thought the trench was abandoned?

and leaves them incapable of defending their traditionally hardened defensive positions. Otherwise, the UA will have to find a way to economically force them out. Maybe airpower can deliver a coup de grace allowing newly formed armored formations (with the NATO stuff) freedom to peel the onion and run down the demoralized conscripts. I think I am getting ahead of the situation.

https://www.army-technology.com/features/russias-military-planners-in-ukraine-muddled-by-anachronism/ “We can be absolutely certain that Ukraine has prepared a defence in depth and that it’s probably concentrating its armoured units in formations as counterattack forces. “And indeed, I imagine the Ukrainian command would let a serious Russian offensive advance into that territory, inflicting attrition with artillery fire and anti-tank fire, and would then use its armour to deliver decisive counterattacks before going over to the counter-offensive. “I’m pretty certain that, if the Russian command is applying its own military doctrine, it will be seeking to do the same.” Might just become a 100% political call and who blinks first? By springtime, political factors will imperil both sides to engage, with the earliest attacker benefiting from military first-mover advantages but exposed to counterattacks by defender’s artillery and armour. “I’m certain both sides are pressing to do this. “Now, providing that Ukrainian allies can supply sufficient ammunition and equipment,” says Barry, “political and battlefield leadership, as well as western weapons, may well give Ukraine tactical advantage. But it’s not clear to me that Kiev has enough combat power to rapidly eject Russian forces.” The question of Ukraine’s capacity to resist attritional attacks lays at the centre of any outlook over the nation’s prospects for victory. Henry Boyd, research fellow for defence and military analysis at the IISS has looked extensively at reports of manpower capability across the duration of the conflict and find that attrition, “certainly for the next year” should not be a limiting factor for the Ukrainian forces’ capability, “but it is one that they will have to bear in mind in terms of their ability to spend blood and treasure.” So Ukraine has to resist the temptation to strike first to not expend manpower in a offensive that might not have the weight right now to carry the day. Better to let the RA do what it does worse, move on the open battlefield.