Uh so has Debaltseve fallen?

[Rosseau]

I could see the headline now:  U.S. wargame developer 'predicted' current events in Crimea, Ukraine

 

I would not be so quick to dismiss Hister's suggestion. You'd have to provide everything relevant you've said on the issue from day-one. A daunting task but easily documented by your posts. But I can see the benefits for BFC and the media, in general. Depending on how good Hister's and other's connections are.

 

I have been a magazine editor for 30 years, and writing is the most difficult thing I do in my life. So not like I'm looking for more pain. But I volunteer if needed.

[Battlefront.com]

I agree it would be instructive to expose how bad the reporting and analysis has been thus far. And yeah,I've got plenty of materials to use if I were to do that. Specifically reams of emails and posts talking about the backstory years before Maidan started, a 221 page thread that we (Black Sea dev guys) have been using to track the crisis since 19th of February 2014, and reams of emails since.

I've looked over some of these from time to time. So far I'd say I've not been wrong about the "big things" that mattered in any significant way, but have been wrong about plenty of details due to imperfect information. I used to be more wrong than right when it came to guessing what Putin would do at various decision points. Quite a while ago I switched to assuming he would take the "dumbest" option and my track record has improved greatly

To be fair to Putin, he boxed himself in before this crisis even started, which is why we figured he'd invade the minute he saw Ukraine becoming independent. Now none of the options in front of him come without serious downsides. As is often the case, most of those downsides are going to be put on the shoulders of average people just trying to live their lives.

Steve

[Macisle]

...To be fair to Putin, he boxed himself in before this crisis even started, which is why we figured he'd invade the minute he saw Ukraine becoming independent. Now none of the options in front of him come without serious downsides. As is often the case, most of those downsides are going to be put on the shoulders of average people just trying to live their lives.

 

Steve, did you see the 01/13/15 Frontline episode on Putin? If so, how accurate do you think the content was? Assuming it was accurate, then one aspect of Putin's thinking that must be taken into account going forward is that he has reached a point where he feels his personal safety requires that he stay in power.

[Battlefront.com]

I never got around to seeing the Frontline episode, and therefore can not directly comment. I also don't want to stray too far into the politics of this war. However, if the Frontline's primary position is that Putin views his position in power directly connected to Ukraine, that's pretty much what every "Putin watcher" believes to be the case. It certainly explains why every decision point where Russia could back down while retaining its gains (up to that point) Putin has gone the opposite direction.

Last year, when the crisis started, Obama and other officials in the US (at least, I don't remember Europe) said that this did not have to be a "zero sum game". That Russia could get it's security concerns, which Obama described as "legitimate", secured through diplomacy and the help of Europe. As many "Putin watchers" said at the time, the problem with Obama's position is that the US and Europe don't need Ukraine and therefore can negotiate without harm to itself. Russia, on the other hand, rightly or wrongly views any compromise on Ukrainian independence as leading to the destruction and/or irrelevance of Russia as a nation state. Therefore, for Russia it very much is a "zero sum game" and the behavior since February 2014 has clearly shown this to be true.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

In military news, there was a report of a separatist/Russian tank attack on the Mariupol front. No details, but that and constant shelling each and every day doesn't bode well for the future of Minsk 2. Not that careful watchers of this war thought there was much of a chance it would be respected. I said as much a few pages ago.

The question still is if the ceasefire violations and localized attacks are simply to keep things destabilized (slightly risky) or if they are the prelude to another major ground attack (very risky). Since one is logical by Western thinking and the other is not, I'm unfortunately putting my money on another major ground attack.

Steve

[Frankster65]

Steve, did you see the 01/13/15 Frontline episode on Putin? If so, how accurate do you think the content was? Assuming it was accurate, then one aspect of Putin's thinking that must be taken into account going forward is that he has reached a point where he feels his personal safety requires that he stay in power.

 

This was a very interesting episode and well worth watching.  They really dug deep into the background of Putin, his associates etc.  Many things were learned but if I had to take just one thing out of this airing, it would be that Putin is not the type of guy who suffers humiliation lightly.  He would take down an entire nation(s) in order to save his self-perceived standing in the world. 

[Buzz]

I never got around to seeing the Frontline episode, and therefore can not directly comment. I also don't want to stray too far into the politics of this war. However, if the Frontline's primary position is that Putin views his position in power directly connected to Ukraine, that's pretty much what every "Putin watcher" believes to be the case. It certainly explains why every decision point where Russia could back down while retaining its gains (up to that point) Putin has gone the opposite direction.

Last year, when the crisis started, Obama and other officials in the US (at least, I don't remember Europe) said that this did not have to be a "zero sum game". That Russia could get it's security concerns, which Obama described as "legitimate", secured through diplomacy and the help of Europe. As many "Putin watchers" said at the time, the problem with Obama's position is that the US and Europe don't need Ukraine and therefore can negotiate without harm to itself. Russia, on the other hand, rightly or wrongly views any compromise on Ukrainian independence as leading to the destruction and/or irrelevance of Russia as a nation state. Therefore, for Russia it very much is a "zero sum game" and the behavior since February 2014 has clearly shown this to be true.

Steve

 

For Russia aka Putin, Ukraine  is a "zero sum game" from all that I have knowledge of. Thankfully a bit more than contemporary US media offers. I don't know wether to laugh or cry when senior reporters on US cable can't get their 'facts' (fed to them) clear... then on to what is new on faz book. Call me old fashioned 

 

This was a very interesting episode and well worth watching.  They really dug deep into the background of Putin, his associates etc.  Many things were learned but if I had to take just one thing out of this airing, it would be that Putin is not the type of guy who suffers humiliation lightly.  He would take down an entire nation(s) in order to save his self-perceived standing in the world. 

 

aka ... Bully with a Big Bear to back him up. I would agree that Putin knows if he shows any weakness he is ripe for a forced and very permananet relocation plan. I have that Frontline on DVR but have yet to watch it. I will make time to catch up on their take.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Buzz

[Macisle]

Steve, I didn't mean to inject politics beyond putting forward the idea that, if the documentary has accurate content, decisions by Putin that seem "dumb" to outsiders may be coming from the fact that he is using a different chessboard than outsiders who attempt to analyze him. His chessboard requires him to place maintaining his own position in perpetuity at top priority, if only for his personal safety, while putting his agenda for restoration/expansion of Russian power and prestige in the second spot.

 

To connect this to the military situation, this means that the "pieces" he decides to move, what he is willing to sacrifice, how long he can tolerate a "bad" situation (or even if it is really a bad situation in his eyes--or just another opportunity solve a different problem), etc., may seem very illogical to analysts attempting to gauge him using US/UK/NATO thinking patterns.

[Buzz]

Watched the Frontline piece tonight. I would agree with Macisle and Frankster65.

 

In military news, there was a report of a separatist/Russian tank attack on the Mariupol front. No details, but that and constant shelling each and every day doesn't bode well for the future of Minsk 2. Not that careful watchers of this war thought there was much of a chance it would be respected. I said as much a few pages ago.

The question still is if the ceasefire violations and localized attacks are simply to keep things destabilized (slightly risky) or if they are the prelude to another major ground attack (very risky). Since one is logical by Western thinking and the other is not, I'm unfortunately putting my money on another major ground attack.

Steve

 

I think, unfortunately,  you picked the right horse Steve.

Edited February 26, 2015 by Buzz

[Battlefront.com]

Buzz,

That is absolutely the case. Entirely different games are being played with Ukraine. It's been that way since Putin came on the scene as FSB head way back when.

However, I do think there's been a lot of mistakes made even considering the game from Putin's point of view. Miscalculations in Ukraine have resulted in overreach that left Russia in an extremely vulnerable state for the oil price collapse. Miscalculations in the over dependence upon oil/gas to singlehandedly increase Russia's domestic standard of living and pursue an aggressive foreign policy eliminated possibilities to mitigate such an oil price drop.

Throughout history autocratic systems (corporate or state) have repeatedly fallen victim to the laws of entropy because past successes have convinced the leadership it has a magic formula for infinite future success. They mistake luck for skill, cunning for intelligence, and ruthlessness for wisdom. It never ends well. Unfortunately, a lot of innocent people are usually harmed in the final phase.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

Throughout history autocratic systems (corporate or state) have repeatedly fallen victim to the laws of entropy because past successes have convinced the leadership it has a magic formula for infinite future success. They mistake luck for skill, cunning for intelligence, and ruthlessness for wisdom. It never ends well. Unfortunately, a lot of innocent people are usually harmed in the final phase.

 

Yep. That's exactly right.

 

Michael

[emccabe]

Steve what would you consider a good place to get accurate information on what's going on in ukraine

[Battlefront.com]

Steve what would you consider a good place to get accurate information on what's going on in ukraine

There are a number of places to look for information. "Good" is always in the eye of the beholder Those who are inclined to believe the Russian version of events will look at one set and actively reject the others. Likewise, those who know the Russian version of events is almost complete bunk will look at an entirely different set of sources. Both have subsets that vary from utterly ridiculous to pretty solid. It takes a while to figure out which is which, unfortunately.

I think the single best "portal" for information is here:

http://liveuamap.com/

It is obviously pro-Ukrainian, however it is not a cheerleading site like many others. They post plenty of things which are critical of the Ukrainian government, a well as the West and Russia.

The daily log of events covers a wide range of topics, many of which are not military based. They reference sources, they do not make content. The sources are extremely diverse and *do* include separatist/Russian sources. Most of the links are to sources in Russian language, so use:

http://translate.google.com

Note that most Ukrainian sources are, ironically, in Russian. Which makes the official Russian government position that Ukraine is out to destroy the Russian language in Ukraine rather silly looking.

Some random notes to keep in mind:

1. The pictures posted by many articles/tweets are not to be trusted as relevant to the subject matter. They might be, but "stock photos" are more common than not. If you keep that in mind you can usually tell the difference.

2. Tweets that are not from a credible account (government official, journalist, someone with public standing, etc.) should be totally dismissed unless there is a source cited. Don't even give them a second thought if you can't identify who it is and/or follow a link.

3. Mischaracterizations of statements and events are, as is usual, frequent. That applies to the summaries on the blog or in the content it links to. Be prepared to question what you read more so than you might otherwise do.

4. Some of the sources are cited fairly regularly. After awhile you will see patterns and you can focus on the sources that regularly provide interesting information that passes the "sniff test".

5. Be aware that some factions of the pro-Ukrainian side are alarmists. According to their "info" the sky is always falling or is about to fall. They sometimes have good information, but often their interpretation of it is crap. Fortunately over time many of these sources have been discredited enough by their Chicken Little behavior that they aren't as prevalent as they once were. Still, they are out there.

6. Ukrainians use the word "terrorist" in several contexts. It is important to understand this. By and large there are two types of "terrorists". The first is the outright type which is conducting operations within Ukrainian government territory, such as the recent bombings in Kharkiv. No question that these guys are, by any reasonable standard, "terrorists". The second group are the non-Ukrainian nationals fighting either as militia or as Russian government forces (army, navy/marines, FSB, GRU). Depending on how you define terrorist, they do or do not fit the definition. Or more likely, some do and some perhaps do not. Until there is some sort of legal proceeding based on actions, it is just a label and don't pay it much attention.

7. Understand that many Ukrainian sources will identify specific Russian units operating in Ukraine. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that this means large numbers of x unit are in y place at z time. It could be as small as a company or specialized platoon, or they could be wrong entirely. This does not mean the sources are wrong per se, just that you might get an impression of massive amounts of Russian regular forces in a particular area when in fact there might only be 30 or so. Of course the separatist/Russian supporters say the number is always 0, but that's so thoroughly disproven it can be safely ignored.

As for other sources I visit regularly:

To research a specific topic I use Google just like everybody else. It exposes the reader to lots of different sources over time. And those sources can be incorporated into researching this mess in more general terms. There's a few Western media sources that repeatedly come up as valuable:

http://foreignpolicy.com/(subscribe to this one as it is awesome!)

http://www.businessinsider.com

A Russian based, but Western partnered, website that has excellent articles on all things Russia is The Moscow Times. It's reporting is fairly unbiased, but they do tread carefully. Especially with recent changes to media laws that put them even closer to seizure/shutdown by the Russian government:

http://www.themoscowtimes.com

Earlier in the conflict I used to visit a New World Order/Tinfoil Hat conspiracy theory website. It was LOADED with Putinbots, neo-Nazis, Stalinists, Monarchists, Orthodox radicals, doomsday Christians, anarchists, sadomasochists, anti-Zionists, and the usual mental defectives that are allowed onto the Internet. I found a ton of good videos at a time before the material was being spread around by less "icky" sources. After reading a couple hundred pages of their rantings, and wondering if the Human race will survive as a species, I decided to never again go back there. OK, I did once or twice and it was as bad as it ever was. So obviously I do not recommend going to the conspiracy theory websites for information

This website has some useful English translations, mostly Tymchuk's fairly regular postings of the military situation:

http://maidantranslations.com/

The oldest and (at least previously) most active English language website for "Novorussia" is made by a Canadian with the usual suspected ties to various Russian organizations. Often some very good stuff to read, but of course you need to wear your hip waders if you don't want to get the stink on you as you wade through it. This was originally setup in conjunction with Girkin when he was running part of the show. Since his departure back to Russia the website has produced far fewer articles and almost no current event news as it once did.

http://slavyangrad.org/

OSCE has a decent website for their reports. Generally I don't check the information unless there is a specific allegation I'm fact checking. The reports are pretty much the same day after day... separatists block their access, harass them, occasionally shoot at them, and yet they still manage to occasionally make some observations which directly contradict the official separatist/Russian story. Which is probably why they are blocked, harassed, and occasionally shot at. But I could be off base with that presumption

http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/daily-updates

A source that the pro separatists/Russians hate with a passion, or so it seems, is this one. It's reporting is often quite good, but in an information war where information is imperfect there has to be some pinches of salt taken with what you read here:

https://en.informnapalm.org/

And finally, there is this site that the pro-separatists/Russians hate more than any other source from what I can tell:

http://www.interpretermag.com/category/blog/

This is a long running organization based in the UK and funded by dissident Russians. The information here is routinely dismissed as "propaganda" by pro-separatist/Russians without any attempt to challenge the facts and messages being posted here. To someone who is experienced in these matters, that sort of blanket dismissal is an indication that the information is more accurate than not more times than not. The blog entries range from passing along information to their own analysis. They document their sources pretty well and in the year that I've been following it I've found the site largely accurate when it comes to facts. Their opinions, of course, are biased and so those are more up in the air in terms of credibility. As are opinion pieces anywhere.

The others I wind up reading regularly are usually linked to by some of the above on a regular basis.

Hopefully that helps.

Steve

[A Canadian Cat]

Hey that looks like a great list of resources.  Thank you for that.  Any objections to my sharing this post with my Father - we spent a lot of time talking about the Ukrainian crisis during his recent visit and he was interested in some of the discussion here.

[Battlefront.com]

Posts are here in public, so I'm not in control of what is done with it

Steve

[AttorneyAtWar]

Well we have our first real world scenario available in the maps and scenarios forum section, ironically it is a Separatist attack on Debaltseve!

   

[A Canadian Cat]

Posts are here in public, so I'm not in control of what is done with it

Steve

 

Oh I spaced on that - I thought I was reading it in the beta forum.  Need more coffee or perhaps a nap.

[Jargotn]

Thanks for the summary, Steve!

I regularly visit the livemap to keep an overview. I use this information not to find out what is happening, but to find out where something might be happening. It's a good pool of information and it shows many small pieces of what is going on in ukraine. I think it helped me to get a deeper understanding of the conflict and what is happening on the ground. I'll take a look at the other sources. They look promising.

[Saferight]

Hey steve whats your opinion on dmitry tymchuk's site? http://sprotyv.info/en

Edited February 26, 2015 by Saferight

[Battlefront.com]

Hey steve whats your opinion on dmitry tymchuk's site? http://sprotyv.info/en

The site itself? I don't visit it because anything that Tymchuk has to say is posted on other sites. So going to his site directly is redundant for me.

As for the information, it the best consistent and nearly daily source of information on frontline activities. He presents the information with a minimum of nationalist language and speculation. Tymchuk has excellent sources and the information he presents is more often than not correct. The errors are within what I consider normal boundaries of rapid wartime information gathering (i.e. imperfect by definition). At one point the separatists were providing their own reports, which was interesting to compare against Tymchuk's reporting. However, as I noted above that seems to have gone by the wayside after Girkin was forced out.

Steve

[DreDay]

Yep. That's exactly right.

 

Michael

 

According to whom? There TONS of examples in recent history of autocratic governments being extremely successful in rescuing their nations from all kinds of economic, social, and military woes. Of course, autocracy is not an ideal form of government (and I sure as hell would not want to live under one), but there is certainly a time and a place for it. Russians seem to think that now is a time and place for it in their country, but we know much better based on what Bloomberg and PBS tell us, right?

 

BTW, on a totally unrelated note - it was announced today that February 27th would from now on be celebrated as an SSO day in Russian military holiday calendar... wink..wink..hint..hint..

[Battlefront.com]

According to whom? There TONS of examples in recent history of autocratic governments being extremely successful in rescuing their nations from all kinds of economic, social, and military woes. Of course, autocracy is not an ideal form of government (and I sure as hell would not want to live under one), but there is certainly a time and a place for it.

Yes, I agree with your statement that there is sometimes a time and a place for autocracy. But when an autocratic regime is not deposed or "enlightened", its collapse is inevitable. It can sometimes take a *LONG* time, but it will happen. I do not see a "ton" of exceptions to the inevitable.

Not to say that the replacement is going to be better, because sadly it is often replaced with something worse before it gets something better.

 

Russians seem to think that now is a time and place for it in their country, but we know much better based on what Bloomberg and PBS tell us, right?

A battered wife will often defend her brutal husband because it's all she knows. Her father beat her and her mother, and her mother's mother was probably beaten as well. She not only doesn't know of a different way to live, she doesn't feel she can do better. So she sticks with what she knows instead of change. Sometimes she actively thwarts efforts to help her. Too often she lives her whole life that way, and too often that life is cut short.

If this is the way the wife wants to live her life, I suppose you could look the other way. But that brutal husband is also a guy out in the rest of the world, and he's likely not limiting his bad behavior to his punching-bag wife. Worse, if he is a father the he is raising a new generation of kids that will most likely learn the way to succeed is through brutality.

I don't know about you, but I prefer to live in a world without wife beating husbands who ensure their kids carry on the legacy of violence.

 

Steve

[DreDay]

Yes, I agree with your statement that there is sometimes a time and a place for autocracy. But when an autocratic regime is not deposed or "enlightened", its collapse is inevitable. It can sometimes take a *LONG* time, but it will happen. I do not see a "ton" of exceptions to the inevitable.

Not to say that the replacement is going to be better, because sadly it is often replaced with something worse before it gets something better.

 

A battered wife will often defend her brutal husband because it's all she knows. Her father beat her and her mother, and her mother's mother was probably beaten as well. She not only doesn't know of a different way to live, she doesn't feel she can do better. So she sticks with what she knows instead of change. Sometimes she actively thwarts efforts to help her. Too often she lives her whole life that way, and too often that life is cut short.

If this is the way the wife wants to live her life, I suppose you could look the other way. But that brutal husband is also a guy out in the rest of the world, and he's likely not limiting his bad behavior to his punching-bag wife. Worse, if he is a father the he is raising a new generation of kids that will most likely learn the way to succeed is through brutality.

I don't know about you, but I prefer to live in a world without wife beating husbands who ensure their kids carry on the legacy of violence.

 

Steve

 

Nothing in life is constant, and autocratic governments sure as hell are not. That goes without saying. My point was that if the Russians (or Chinese, or Indonesians, or Saudis) value the stability and order that their government brings and are not particularly encouraged by the experience of their "democratic" neighbors - who the hell are we to judge them  and to pitty them? When their societies are ready, they will make that switch... for now they are simply trying to keep things in order; which is more than can be said for most of their neighbors whom we have pushed into chaos under the guise of democracy and freedom. In theory autocratic governments are far from perfect; but in practice our notion of "one size democracy fits all" social modeling has been even more of a failure in the international arena...

[Duckman]

The recent Ukrainan debacles (or at least semi-debacles) are interesting from a military point of view.

 

It seems there is a lot of political interference which forces Ukrainian into bad strategic and tactical positions, like holding Debaltseve (surrounded on three sides and an obvious artillery magnet) and Luhansk airport. The importance of symbolism to decision making is evident in expressions like "our Stalingrad" - always a bad sign.

 

Anyone know the causes of the apparent Russian ("separatist") artillery superiority? There has been mention of new generation Russian drones for target finding, as well as heavier and longer ranged guns than what the Ukrainians have. Lack of Ukrainian counter battery radar is another issue that pops up.

[vincere]

Azov Battalion training. Short, and not overly insightful, other than them using stick formations I've seen use for MOUT, and repetitive action/ reaction drills, which will pay off when adrenaline and fear tsunamis flow:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31657354