How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sross112]

48 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Possibly true. But one point we haven't really discussed here: There is a very loud and vocal pro-delivery faction. Pistorius hinted in his press statement, that many countries are actually sceptical. I don't know if that is true or just a deflection of blame. But I do wonder, how many actually don't want tanks to be delivered and how many are quietly happy that Scholz receives all the blame. I mean, even the US were reluctant to give Bradleys to Ukraine and I don't really buy the point about M1s being too complicated.

I don't know anything other than what you and others have posted on here about the internal politics of Germany, and thank you for taking the time to educate us. I'm a little slow, my favorite crayons are pink ones that taste like strawberries, and I'm looking for input and not trying to bash you, your country or your politicians. Just trying to understand some things.

To me it looks like the German government is not working in favor of their nation politically or economically. I always understood Germany was considered a business minded country and one that was considered the leader of the EU. It doesn't look like she is looking at the big picture or looking ahead at all when it comes to her business interests or maintaining a leadership position. I understood this position a lot better in the beginning when Germany was tied to Russian gas and trying to protect itself and it's people's interests and business interests in what was thought would be a short war with a Russian victory. Now that almost a year has passed and almost every variable that could be recognized as a reason for her actions/in-actions has changed, why hasn't the position morphed? France is a good one in comparison. Started out pretty much the same and rapidly switched around as the conditions changed from attempted mediator to Ukraine supporter.

I also understand that Germany has done a lot for Ukraine, I'm not saying that your country hasn't been a positive contributor. I'm more wondering why a business orientated country and culture wouldn't be positioning itself to be the main supplier of almost everything to the Ukrainian forces in the future? Ukraine is going to need a lot of new stuff and up until all this arms transfer mess Germany was assumed to be the one that would supply them (like they have many others in Europe) when their modern western military is built. Now, honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if not only Ukraine, but the Baltics, Scandinavians, Turkey and some of the Balkans decided not to continue buying from Germany. In 10 years I won't be a bit surprised if the "standard" tank in Europe, the Leopard, has been replaced by something manufactured out of Poland or Scandinavia. This transfer mess could truly be a death warrant for a traditionally thriving sector of German heavy industry. 

I'm of the opinion that politics is generally fueled by money and power. Across the pond that has been my observations and I could be wrong, as well as I could be wrong in assuming that politics and politicians are similar on your continent. With that in mind I can't wrap my head around why Germany wouldn't position herself better for the peace. 

Once again, I appreciate your and other German member's insights into these things and thanks in advance for your time and mind numbing efforts to educate those like me who are trying to understand.  

[Battlefront.com]

8 hours ago, JonS said:

Lake Peipus simplifies Estonia's defensive problem quite a lot.

To be sure, though, "no-man's land will be 100km deep" only applies to spherical cows on an infinite plain. In the real world, ground dictates, as it always has and always will. The distance isn't really important, it's the OODA time that is. Distance is a simplified, tangible proxy for that.

Absolutely.  Terrain conditions can amplify, one way or another, the "rule of thumbs".  Which is why your early war analysis of terrain in the Donbas was so valuable.  You correctly identified the impacts of the terrain on Russia's options to attack and Ukraine's options to defend.  A ridgeline here makes a difference, a swamp there is critical, etc.

8 hours ago, JonS said:

CB these days (and for the last decade+) can have rounds going out before the incoming rounds have landed. Sure, theres some assumptions there about dedicated resources, linked up and waiting for the fire-finder radar to detect something, but technically it is completely doable.

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply it was not technical feasible.  What I meant is that it isn't generally practical and a side may not even have the capability at all or it is dependent upon circumstances that the particular tactic being discussed is designed to thwart.

The big one in this case is maximum range.  A gun with a 25km range can sit 20km distant from the target and hit it no problem while also being far away from the front.  A counter battery gun with a similar range would have to be within a few KM of the target area in order for it to strike back.  If it's that close to the front, it's at high risk of getting destroyed sooner rather than later.  Which then obligates the counter battery system to be something that has greater range than what is trying to kill.  This increases the cost of the system and therefore reduces the number, making it less likely that the system will be in the right area to respond.  Or, as is more likely the case, too expensive to possess in the first place.

Traditionally this is one of the roles of CAS, but we've seen some difficulties with that in other conflicts (Iraiq SCUD launchers) and definitely huge problems in this war.  Loitering munitions is the obvious one to turn to, but they are no magic bullet either as they come with a raft of limitations of their own.  Especially in terms of layered defenses.

8 hours ago, JonS said:

It's a pretty small haystack, though. After a few missions you'll know which gridsquare(s) the fire is originating from, so that's all the area you need to search. A bit of simple map recce will then tell you where the hides are likely to be, and bingo you're in business.

(A hide is where the guns, uh, hide between missions, where the crews rest and eat, where planning for the next mission occurs, and where maintenance and ammo resupply occurs. SPs carry very small amounts of ammo, and will be bombing up - and refuelling - a lot. Caesar, for instance, only holds 36 rounds.)

For sure the attacking side needs to be skillful and/or the enemy incapable for this to be optimally effective.  It's a small haystack for something like a heavy mortar or even 155, but for HIMARS type weapons?  Massive.  And the ability to hit something 150km distant with precision is yet another challenge.

Steve

[danfrodo]

adding more to the frustration pile about Leo2s.  But at the bottom is a nice list of what's being sent by various countries.  A lot of good gear but it would be so much better if some of the items were more standardized -- like lots of marders & Leo2s, duh, which would have easier logistics & maintenence pipeline than having lots of different platforms.  

But there's lots of good stuff being sent, all the same.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/1/20/2148245/-Ukraine-update-The-Great-Tank-Standoff-is-foolish-politicians-fiddling-while-Ukraine-bleeds

 

[billbindc]

On 1/18/2023 at 10:56 PM, The_Capt said:

One might think the US and Ukraine are doing integrated planning or something.  Now I wonder where the next UA operation is going to happen?  My honest guess is the pull another one-two punch, starting in the east to pull the RA, and then hit Melitopol to cut that strategic bridge and render the RA split.

It seems like another Russian offensive of sorts is in the cards. I'm putting my money on Ukraine waiting for the RA to commit to it and then a drive towards Tokmak along the right side of the Konka with diversionary probes along the southern Dnieper.

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think this might be one of those cases where if enough important customers are willing to unite and flaunt the rules at the same time, they will just get a few angry words now and then after a couple of years, there will be a common understanding that these were exceptional circumstances and let bygones be bygones.

Given that Germany seems VERY willing to give Putin that deal on the INVASION OF UKRAINE, I think the one thing the Poles can be sure of is that no one in Berlin has a spine.

[chrisl]

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

Your guess is as good as mine. I only know a bit about export controls in the private sector and the usual warning that you should make damn sure not only to stick to German export restrictions but also to US export restrictions if you don't want your company to end up on some blacklist or to get sued in the US (both bad if you plan on making money in the US ever again). That clearly doesn't apply here. Maybe something is possible on EU level and of course Germany could ban Poland from receiving arms exports in the future. But I guess the real consequence is further damage to German-Polish relations and, as I said earlier, possibly consequences in the future as other arms exporting countries may come to the conclusion that Poland cannot be trusted to not give weapons to countries you don't want to have them.

I can speak a little bit with respect to US export controls - the export license for arms (which are very broadly defined) is completely separate from the purchase contract.  The export restrictions are a set of rules derived from federal law and if you violate them you're subject to both civil penalties (typically for the organization) and individual criminal penalties for the particular people involved.  When you get a license or partial exemption for an export, that generally comes with an acknowledgement that the recipient person or organization has to sign that acknowledges that if they want to re-export the item (which could even be transfer to other citizens of their own country) they have to go through the whole export approval process.  For a foreign actor there isn't anything like fines that can be imposed, but it can put the company on a blacklist, put the country on a blacklist, and put the people on a wanted list so that if they try to enter US territory they'd be arrested on entry.  

I've had to sign similar acknowledgements when buying things from foreign countries, where there was no obvious penalty, but if I'd violated them I'd presumably end up on an arrest list if I tried to enter.  

I think the bet here on the Polish side is that nobody in the German government would take the political risk of trying to enforce the re-export restrictions because of the public backlash they'd face.  It likely comes down the the risk that the individual Poles doing the actual exporting perceive - it's one thing to put the leader of a foreign government on trial, but would arrest and trial of the guys in shipping and receiving get raised to the same level of visibility?  Given Poland's history with neighbors to both east and west, I suspect they DGAF and would be happy to drive the Leopards all the way to Moscow themselves.

[Butschi]

5 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Given that Germany seems VERY willing to give Putin that deal on the INVASION OF UKRAINE, I think the one thing the Poles can be sure of is that no one in Berlin has a spine.

BS. Of the very offending sort.

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, Butschi said:

I won't defend Scholz, I'm done with that, I was very much expecting him to give us a clear yes or no today. So there is not much to argue with what you say.

Which illustrates my point about bad leadership very well.  You have never defended Scholz, but have instead tried to explain the logic of why he is doing what he is doing, then defending the logic. I think of that as very different and VERY useful.  You have also reacted against emotional statements made against Germany and Scholz from the frustration that comes from all of this.  Very good of you to do both of these things.  I know I'm not the only one that appreciates it (comment above proves that!).  Thank you!

7 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Just this one point: I highly doubt that US arms deliveries have even a tiny bit more favorable clauses attached. Hypothetically, if Poland had announced they would give M1s to Ukraine without the explicit ok from the US government there would have been hell to pay. Let's not apply double standards here.

For sure the US has very solidly stated that it doesn't want to escalate this war and has pursued a very deliberate policy of withholding things from Ukraine, at least for a period of time.  However, the US has acted with other nations in unison for the most part.  More importantly, it seems the withholding of certain things has been done strategically and with the intention of eventually delivering them to Ukraine when conditions are deemed favorable.  We may not agree with the details of what the US is doing, but I think most of us agree it is generally the correct approach.

In the end the US policy is the same as the stated policy of Scholz, which is to avoid escalating the war.  The difference is that the US policy is flexible in terms of assessing that risk, Scholz's is... well... hard to pin down because it is not consistently stated or followed even when statements are made.

To sum up, I think the US and Germany have consistent stated policies about avoiding escalation with the transfer of new capabilities to Ukraine.  No double standard.  The criticism of Scholz is how he's implementing the shared strategic vision to the point that people are rightly wondering if Scholz really believes what he is saying.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, Butschi said:

BS. Of the very offending sort.

Agreed.  The comment you responded to was not based in fact, but based on emotion.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, chrisl said:

I think the bet here on the Polish side is that nobody in the German government would take the political risk of trying to enforce the re-export restrictions because of the public backlash they'd face.

Yup, and boy wasn't this a predictable situation Scholz got his country into.  I'm sure Poland has made its intentions very clear in public for months now.  Again, it seems Scholz is just hopelessly bad at leading Germany effectively.

Steve

[FancyCat]

Ring a round a Rosie. Probably why now the message is that actually Germany is kindly speaking for the majority of NATO in not being in favor of tanks at this time.

 

[Lethaface]

9 hours ago, Huba said:

Finally! 

 

If we really go on delivering F-16s that would be a show of leadership I'd applaud. I don't like this Hoekstra but that's not relevant. However I wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow some ex-airforce general comes on the wire and says that delivering any significant number of F-16s isn't feasible short term.

It's easy to say we are for donating Leo2s because we don't have any. Basically it's just financing / giving money. Anyway compared to Scholz  I think our government is handling the Ukraine effort quite well. But let's see what actually materializes, I'm not really fond of speculating / expectation building before the facts are on the table.

[Beleg85]

49 minutes ago, chrisl said:

think the bet here on the Polish side is that nobody in the German government would take the political risk of trying to enforce the re-export restrictions because of the public backlash they'd face.  It likely comes down the the risk that the individual Poles doing the actual exporting perceive - it's one thing to put the leader of a foreign government on trial, but would arrest and trial of the guys in shipping and receiving get raised to the same level of visibility?  Given Poland's history with neighbors to both east and west, I suspect they DGAF and would be happy to drive the Leopards all the way to Moscow themselves.

It all come down to different perception of danger we discussed before. When you see something as existential danger- and Central Europeans+ Finn think this way- the hell with paper and procedures. One can look at US arms deliveries in WWII how much creative beurocracy can be done if there is a political will.

On other note, during Polish MoD conference Błaszczak spoke strangely kindly of contructive talks from Ramstein and that he still have hope Germany will give green light. They seem to be rather reassured all will go well.Perhaps they know something more?

Anyway, this new brigade should be trained on T-72s and BMP-1's. I doubt they will have time to make it from scratch, probably some elements are already here on training or they plan to pull out some troops from Ukraine

Overall, I dont't think the help for UA will be enough for what we hoped for. It is still significant, but no tanks nor long-range fires in near future. Also Milley was pretty straightforward that dislodging muscovites from land they took may be very difficult.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Beleg85

[Lethaface]

31 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, and boy wasn't this a predictable situation Scholz got his country into.  I'm sure Poland has made its intentions very clear in public for months now.  Again, it seems Scholz is just hopelessly bad at leading Germany effectively.

Steve

Maybe after this endeavor the average german will be more compelled to vote for visionary, decisive leadership. That has not been the case for quite a while imo.
One of the negatives of coalition party politics is the type of people it attracts, especially in 'dull' times. The type of leadership needed for times / matters like these are probably working somewhere in the German industry.

[FancyCat]

28 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, and boy wasn't this a predictable situation Scholz got his country into.  I'm sure Poland has made its intentions very clear in public for months now.  Again, it seems Scholz is just hopelessly bad at leading Germany effectively.

Steve

Not just Scholz. The Dingo, a MRAP, was embarrassing for Germany.

Interestingly, Lambrecht had also in the article referenced in the tweet below, touted a desire for further European cooperation in defense projects.

Quoted below, interesting considering present day.

Quote

Lambrecht also spoke out in favor of more joint arms-development projects with EU partners, but stressed that Berlin must be willing to drop its veto right when it comes to selling those weapons to third countries — a demand that is likely to clash with Economy Minister Robert Habeck from the Green party, whose ministry oversees export authorizations and has vowed to enforce a stricter line on weapon deals.  "Germany's 'veto' right in such projects must be questioned and adjusted," Lambrecht said. "It's not about us delivering to some rogue state. But if I'm doing such a project together with my allies, who share the same values as I do, and if I'm the only country there that has a different position on an export, then you have to ask yourself whether that can actually be the obstacle."

 

[Twisk]

Does anyone with more experience know the chances of the U.S. being able to train a Battalion sized element without the media knowing about it? WW2 style where you have like 800 picked Ukrainians locked in a base somewhere, everyone's phones are taken, trainers are told to shut the blank up?

The reason I ask is that I've wondered a few times whether these delivery orders (50 Bradley, Patriot installations) actually coincide with training being largely completed for the Ukrainians who are going to operate these or train other Ukrainians. We keep hearing about these deliveries and the whole "it will take a year to train" but it seems to be not taking that long so either the training is sped up dramatically or there are a bunch of Ukrainians getting training well before the equipment has been handed over.

[Huba]

2 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Overall, I dont't think the help for UA will be enough for what we hoped for. It is still significant, but no tanks nor long-range fires in near future.

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1616481025982332943?t=tQL8tx8nFvkBmnvXkKC9Bw&s=19

[Beleg85]

1 minute ago, Huba said:

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1616481025982332943?t=tQL8tx8nFvkBmnvXkKC9Bw&s=19

Deleted tweet, the guy made mistake writing UK donate ATCMS...which it does not possess.

[MikeyD]

2 minutes ago, Twisk said:

...the chances of the U.S. being able to train a Battalion sized element without the media knowing about it?

If the Battalion being trained included celebrities and influencers the press would be all over the story. Otherwise, not so much. 

[Lethaface]

13 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

It all come down to different perception of danger we discussed before. When you see something as existential danger- and Central Europeans+ Finn think this way- the hell with paper and procedures. One can look at US arms deliveries in WWII how much creative beurocracy can be done if there is a political will.

Indeed if there's political will and mutual cooperation a lot can be done quickly. But looking at things glass half full, already a lot has been done and there is more unity compared to a year ago. 

 

13 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

On other note, during Polish MoD conference Błaszczak spoke strangely kindly of contructive talks from Ramstein and that he still have hope Germany will give green light. They seem to be rather reassured all will go well.Perhaps they know something more?

Of course there are always the backroom talks where things are actually discussed before they are presented in the public during the meeting. From a mutual cooperation pov it's a good sign that Polish MoD Blaszczak signalled constructive talks, in general that's how one get's to results (even if nothing has been achieved so far) ;-). In my opinion too much has been played through the media about these subjects the last few months. That might also be of influence in the way certain countries politicians behave themselves. Under pressure people can do strange things.
 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Lethaface

[Lethaface]

51 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, and boy wasn't this a predictable situation Scholz got his country into.  I'm sure Poland has made its intentions very clear in public for months now.  Again, it seems Scholz is just hopelessly bad at leading Germany effectively.

Steve

He's also quite visibly uncomfortable on most of the images/video's that get posted of him during interviews/talks. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't sit out his term, although I don't know how usual that is in Germany.

[FancyCat]

Decent points, aren’t there still tons of contractors in Iraq that help the Iraqi military? And while yes, contractors are different, I’m unsure what the public response would be towards a repair depot being struck by Russian missiles containing American citizens doing maintenance on Abrams. 

huh, while looking into Iraq and how it deals with logistics, apparently the U.S suspended contractors for repairing the tanks after several fell into Iranian militants hands and Iraq failed to get them back. This was in 2018, I can’t find info stating whether this repair center ever came back into service, or how Iraq deals with their inventory of tanks now, whether it can keep them in service or not. Something to keep in mind, Iraq started purchasing tanks from Russia again and continues to do so.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/02/u-s-made-tanks-that-fell-into-militia-hands-in-iraq-sparks-assistance-standoff/

 

 

[Beleg85]

16 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Indeed if there's political will and mutual cooperation a lot can be done quickly. But looking at things glass half full, already a lot has been done and there is more unity compared to a year ago. 

Yeah, but given the volative situation at the frontlines complacency is way more dangerous than overreaction. Pressure must be constantly being put on German leaders not to lag behind by external and domestic public, no time for niceties and paper-chewing. Rememeber, hundreds of people are getting smashed to bits daily. Clearly Kremlin is preparing something big this year, more than just defence of captured territories. They are seem very confident they will win this, or drag enough to wear down the West.

That is most concening thought regarding today's situation- not the material part alone, but Putin's reading of it.

On the other side, Tellin declaration is a sign of firm support- we invested in Ukrainian cause too much to let it go by now.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Beleg85

[Ts4EVER]

Remember pre-22 when Germany was always quite far at the front of all those "most respected countries" polls? People even called Merkel "the leader of the free world" for a while, because she was arguably less loony than Trump. That's the world Scholz was born for. When the main task of a German politician was protecting the interests of German businesses and shaking hands with this or that sheikh or dictator to get the money flowing. He has not given up on that dream yet.

[dan/california]

Reposting this to re-up the idea of Britain sending most or all of the Challenger 2 fleet. It may not be the most rational way of getting the Ukrainians a meaningful amount of NATO armor by this spring. But it seems to be the only one with the slightest chance of happening. 

And by yes they probably need the GLSDB first, and more. It appears those are just now being assembled though.