WOW Psychic

[Vanitas]

Well, this are the times that real life events are much more frightfull than a wargame. Interested to see how far NATO will go in this case. Latest I hear is that Ukraine is mobilising all armed forces and NATO ministers are preparing a response.

[Erik Springelkamp]

NATO will tell Putin that he is no longer welcome at their parties.

[ScoutPL]

I think the best the west could manage now would be economic sanctions such as we have pursued (with some success) with Iran.

Not being an economist, I dont know how effective sanctions against Russia from NATO and the EU (anything broader - UN - would be blocked by Russia or her allies) would be. Basically, Putin currently holds power because the people allow him to. Granted its not a full fledged "free" society yet but I can see him (and the west) placing himself on a rather thin tight rope, if we had the will to do so.

A la' Cold War 1980-1993.

[Alan8325]

On the plus side, the back story of Black Sea should be much easier for BFC now since it's essentially been half (or more) written already in real-life. Hopefully they get the new game out before the war is already over.

As for sanctions against Russia, too bad Russia already declared Bitcoin illegal.

[agusto]

Hopefully the dont decide to drop the Crimea back story because of the events currently taking place in Ukraine.

[Alan8325]

Hopefully the dont decide to drop the Crimea back story because of the events currently taking place in Ukraine.

There was another thread where someone from BFC mentioned that some of the back story had already come true, therefore a 'drop' of the back story probably won't be necessary although they may change it a little. As for campaigns already made, I imagine that missions can be shuffled around, added, deleted if necessary. Not that anything is really necessary for a fictional game as CMSF was.

[Battlefront.com]

I think the best the west could manage now would be economic sanctions such as we have pursued (with some success) with Iran.

Not being an economist, I dont know how effective sanctions against Russia from NATO and the EU (anything broader - UN - would be blocked by Russia or her allies) would be.

In theory they could be crippling. First, a huge chunk of Russia's wealth is overseas in order to avoid taxation and risks from domestic banking practices. If these accounts were frozen the corporations and elite of Russia might find themselves in a bit of a cash crunch. Though, of course, a lot of it isn't in cash but in investments.

But there's another angle...

Basically, Putin currently holds power because the people allow him to. Granted its not a full fledged "free" society yet but I can see him (and the west) placing himself on a rather thin tight rope, if we had the will to do so.

A la' Cold War 1980-1993.

Unlike the Cold War, Russians have direct access to Western made consumer goods and travel. If they are cut off from iPods and trips to Costa Del Sol and what not, there will be grumbling. How much grumbling? I haven't a clue, but it will be more grumbling than they've done since the 1990s.

Remember, Hitler was a popular dictator too. But when the going got tough, people started to have second thoughts. Those that already had second thoughts started to plot.

Putin's got a lot riding on the outcome. It's important for the West/Europe to offer him a way out. Otherwise he's liable to dig in further. That couldn't possibly be a good thing.

Steve

[costard]

It gets even messier when you consider that Europe's gas comes mostly from Russia. Germany now has a pipeline in the North to guarantee it's supply (put in place after the last Ukraine debacle left half of Europe without heating in January), but I still can't see that it would be willing to to shift to another supplier. On the other hand, those countries in the south o Europe which are still dependent on the Ukraine pipeline are mostly bankrupt anyway: cutting off their consumption would bring a new and sharper meaning to austerity.

Think of the narrative: Germany sends troops in to Ukraine to aid Neo-Nazi's, against the express interests of Russia. It just is not going to happen. Your best bet is to blame the Chinese for a brilliantly well thought out plot and hope things settle back down. If you took the time to apprehend and shoot the cretins that got you into this situation you'd be doing us all a favour.

[Battlefront.com]

This is the other weakness of Russia. Basically, Russia is a natural resource based export economy. It is, in fact, why Putin went to war with the oligarchs. They were making all kinds of money off of Russia's cash cows and then tax dodging their profits. So now the state does have enormous income derived principally from gas and oil. It accounts for about 60% of their exports. The bulk of the remaining 40% comes from other natural resources.

What happens to Russia's economy if there is an embargo or tariffs on Russian exports? And what happens when foreign investments dry up, as they surely will even without government intervention? It took a very long time for Russia to prove to investors that Russian manufacturing and infrastructure were good places to park money. Putin has tossed out years of hard work and good will out the window. Even if this conflict ended tomorrow there is sure to be setback on that front.

Who knows how well Russia's economy, as a whole, can weather the storm. For sure the upper echelon of Russian society will feel the pinch pretty easily, but how long until the average person on the street feels it isn't something I have an idea about.

Steve

[Alan8325]

This is why I'm fascinated by the emergence of new financial technology like online crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin. They basically can't be frozen, and with proper security measures can be made anonymous. Iranian merchants are already using them to do international business, bypassing sanctions. If these technologies catch on and remain virtually unregulable, then the only way to enforce sanctions will be by blocking physical goods.

[Collingwood]

This is why I'm fascinated by the emergence of new financial technology like online crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin. They basically can't be frozen, and with proper security measures can be made anonymous.

What I also find fascinating is that if you don't make proper security measures, you can lose close on half a billion dollars worth of Bitcoins a-la Mt Gox. No force required, just good hacking skills. I can imagine some very powerful players (and I don't mean banks) will be interested in that kind of power if someone over-exposes their assets - or even if they don't.

[LongLeftFlank]

Freezing of assets would only affect holdings of Russian state and state-controlled entities, and possibly offshore assets held by high profile individuals who are part of Putin's regime. The vast majority of the Russian kleptocracy would remain untouched.

No, it's Russian mothers who will blow the whistle once body bags start coming home, just as they did before. And Russia no longer has faceless hordes of muzhiks to charge urrahing into the Spandaus. It's an aging, urbanized, plunging birthrate country. Offers of farmland in an ethnically cleansed Kharkov oblast would find few colonists. Unless they shipped in Chechens or sumfink, lol.

[Sgt Joch]

Russia has been re-directing its oil/gas exports towards Asia to be less dependent on European customers and any EU sanctions.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/draft-strategy-sees-russias-oil-and-gas-flow-to-asia-doubling/493331.html

China will buy up everything Russia has to offer and as a bonus, won't interfere in whatever Russia does.

Perhaps a bit cynical, but an interesting analysis on why Russian elites are not worried about any freezing ot their assets:

Moscow is not nervous. Russia’s elites have exposed themselves in a gigantic manner – everything they hold dear is now locked up in European properties and bank accounts. Theoretically, this makes them vulnerable. The EU could, with a sudden rush of money-laundering investigations and visa bans, cut them off from their wealth. But, time and time again, they have watched European governments balk at passing anything remotely similar to the U.S. Magnitsky Act, which bars a handful of criminal-officials from entering the United States.

All this has made Putin confident, very confident – confident that European elites are more concerned about making money than standing up to him. The evidence is there. After Russia’s strike force reached the outskirts of Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, in 2008, there were statements and bluster, but not a squeak about Russia’s billions. After Russia’s opposition were thrown into show trials, there were concerned letters from the European Union, but again silence about Russia’s billions.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/russia-vladimir-putin-the-west-104134.html?hp=f2

Talk is cheap, what is the US and EU really willing to do?

[whitehot78]

Not being an economist, I dont know how effective sanctions against Russia from NATO and the EU (anything broader - UN - would be blocked by Russia or her allies) would be. Basically, Putin currently holds power because the people allow him to. Granted its not a full fledged "free" society yet but I can see him (and the west) placing himself on a rather thin tight rope, if we had the will to do so.

I'm not an economist either, but I feel that the west would hardly impose economic sanctions. The reason is basically that most western countries depends on russian energy products to keep their industrial/logistic infrastructures running. Moreover, if the west would stop buying gas and oil from Russia, they would be forced to import those commodities exclusively from the arab countries - which in this aspect normally act as a single entity (similar prices, contracts and so on in different aarab nations). In such a case, they would of course form a sort of "cartel" and guess what measure they would take on prices.

[ScoutPL]

The EU countries went 50 years without Russian (Soviet) oil and gas. Or at least with the threat of losing what they were getting. They bought from the ME just like the US does. Actually the US doesnt have to buy from the ME, we just do that while hording our own resources. For later and for crises just like this one. When one source dries up (Russia, Iraq, or Venezuela for example) the market shifts and after a few months of price gouging it settles back down. I dont think the EU is as reliant on Russia as perhaps Putin would like to think.

There have been plenty of analysts on the news today saying that economic and diplomatic sanctions would go a long way toward hurting Russia's standing in the geopolitical and economic arena. The real question is whether a coalition can be built that has the determination and strength to carry it out.

What I would really like to see is an Independence Square type uprising in Moscow (hosted by PussyRiot, of course). We'll have to wait and see (and freeze a few thousand bank accounts).

[Buzz]

"...Putin's got a lot riding on the outcome. It's important for the West/Europe to offer him a way out. Otherwise he's liable to dig in further. That couldn't possibly be a good thing. Steve"

I do hope Putin can save face to look like he wins one for Russia for home consumption because an authentic Nato / Russia "exercise" could turn out much more lethal very quickly than most recent modern war events in memory.

I am amazed how few people I speak with in the USA are even aware of where Russia is much less Ukraine. They can tell you who won what Oscar for makeup but what is Crimea? It is actually embarrassing.

[Alan8325]

What happens to Russia's economy if there is an embargo or tariffs on Russian exports? And what happens when foreign investments dry up, as they surely will even without government intervention? It took a very long time for Russia to prove to investors that Russian manufacturing and infrastructure were good places to park money. Putin has tossed out years of hard work and good will out the window. Even if this conflict ended tomorrow there is sure to be setback on that front.

Are there that many countries that would back such sanctions? I imagine the U.S. could get most of the E.U. to go along, but even some of them have been expressing doubts. Putin's recent pullback of forces from the border were probably meant to strengthen those doubts.

[ScoutPL]

I think Putin's "pro-me" campaign has fallen flat on its face after the Olympics and now this. The Russian people may love him (though I suspect its just the same apathy that has plagued them for centuries, they seem to be collectively much more loyal to "Mother Russia" than a particular leader) but his standing (and therefore Russia's) in the world as a whole has fallen. Its kinda hard to present yourself as a legitimate leader or "world power" when you automatically resort to ordering troops to secure foreign territory and then do your best to convince the rest of the world that's not what happened. I suppose we are supposed to believe that the Crimean "militia" were just hording stockpiles of modern small arms, uniforms and equipment?

I don't think anyone would try to deny the Russians a warm water port and as long as Ukrainian sovereignty is respected that's a win-win.

That outcome still gives BFC a legitimate CMBS scenario as well. Russian backed Crimean insurgents cause instability in the region which leads to a gradual buildup of forces east and west that eventually leads to a limited armed conflict.

[Erwin]

Not sure if it was mentioned b4, but the issue of natural gas which Russia supplies Europe with via a pipeline that runs thru Ukraine may add another wrinkle. Europe needs the energy, altho' could find another source given time, but Russia needs the money.

[Erik Springelkamp]

but his standing (and therefore Russia's) in the world as a whole has fallen.

And in Fort Bragg you can assess his standing in the world?

World powers do show their force, like with economic blockades, or with drone attacks that violate sovereign nations.

And it all depends on the local propaganda whether that is viewed as a good or a bad thing.

The removal of the Ukrainian President was unconstitutional, but whether people condemn it or not depends on the propaganda they are exposed to.

Putin is a thug, but so are all leaders of powerful nations.

[ScoutPL]

Given that argument I guess it depends on which thug you are willing to sleep with than doesn't it? I'll take the one who is legitimately elected by his people and faces a confidence vote every four years.

Also, I would imagine the "propaganda" of an open society with a free press is a lot easier to swallow (or discount) than any others.

Thanks for making this (once again) personal.

[Erik Springelkamp]

I'll take the one who is legitimately elected by his people and faces a confidence vote every four years.

Well, that was the President, and he was driven off by a violent revolt by a coalition that included a lot of neo-nazi's and foreign support.

Edit: and of course he was a cleptocrat, but so were his predecessors including the heroin of the opposition.

[ScoutPL]

"a coalition that included a lot of neo-nazi's and foreign support."

And the evidence for this is where exactly?

[Erik Springelkamp]

"a coalition that included a lot of neo-nazi's and foreign support."

And the evidence for this is where exactly?

So you are as uninformed as I thought.

A random sample of information:

http://time.com/4493/ukraine-dmitri-yarosh-kiev/

But I am not going to let myself draw into long discussions here.

[ScoutPL]

Oh, I'm pretty well informed. Get a brief every morning on where I might have to go tomorrow and spread my crazy American tyrannical ways. You made it sound like we should be suspicious of the revolt because is was suffering from neo-Nazi and foreign influences. I just don't see the same things you do in this report. An example:

"The mainstream opposition leaders, like the former world boxing champion Vitali Klitschko, have faced growing pressure to distance themselves from Pravy Sektor, which the U.S. State Department has condemned for “inflaming conditions on the streets.” Increasingly marginalized, the group has grown much more assertive and, in some ways, has started going rogue."

“Pravy Sektor has proved its loyalty to the ideals of freedom,” Yarosh says. “Now we needed to present this movement as a source of leadership.” In any kind of fair election, that would be nearly impossible. Pravy Sektor’s ideology borders on fascism, and it enjoys support only from Ukraine’s most hard-line nationalists, a group too small to secure them a place in parliament." TIME, FEB 4

That doesn't sound like a movement dominated by extremists and "covert" foreign support. It sounds like a group of democratically minded people decided to offer everyone a seat at the table and then (based on his actions) decided Uncle Dimitro wasn't going to fit in after all. Not indicative of extremists leading the revolt at all. Plus, in this case anyway, the foreign influence was actually very positive since it sought to keep the revolution from radicalizing. None of that was indicative of a valid reason why we shouldn't trust that the Ukrainian uprising isn't capable of producing a responsible, democratic government.