How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Tux]

45 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

You know what we haven't had in here for a short while? A nice nuclear punch up. 

 

Interesting but I think several of the criteria listed have been met (or very nearly met) in Ukraine with no nuclear response, yet.  The article leaves it until the end to state:

”William Alberque, director of strategy, technology, and arms control at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told the FT that Russia likely has a higher threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine due to fears it would likely "escalate the conflict and lead to direct intervention by the U.S. or U.K."”

Why does the UK always get highlighted like this?  I don’t think we could meaningfully ‘directly intervene’ if we tried!

 

[Edit: Ninja Capt at it again.  I surrender]

Edited February 28 by Tux
Ninja’d again

[Harmon Rabb]

2 hours ago, Kinophile said:

 

So... It's so great and stealthy it had to be escorted by a flight of Su35s... And it's oh-so-special Missile faceplanted into a field. 

Pretty sure the 35s were intended as meat shields to literally take a Missile hit, not  just engage UKR aviation /AD. 

Very interesting news.

I'm curious if the Su-57 is going to be making regular appearances or is this just Russia showing their new toys to the cameras, to save face because as we all know the skies over Ukraine have not been so friendly to them recently.

Remember that time we heard something about the T-14 Armata showing up on the battlefield and did not hear much about it again?

Anyway,If the Russians do keep using Su-57s this would be a good opportunity to gain some information on how they perform in combat for the future.

Good reminder to send the AFU more AD systems, they sure have used Patriot well so far.

Edit: Yeah, this looks like a made for the cameras propaganda stunt like the T-14.

Quote

Additionally, it has been noted that the Russians utilized the newest Su-57 in a missile attack on Ukraine to make a military propaganda film. This film is expected to be showcased as evidence of the “successful” development of the Russian defense industry ahead of the upcoming presidential elections in Russia.

 

Edited February 28 by Harmon Rabb

[Tux]

18 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Very interesting news.

I'm curious if the Su-57 is going to be making regular appearances or is this just Russia showing their new toys to the cameras, to save face because as we all know the skies over Ukraine have not been so friendly to them recently.

Remember that time we heard something about the T-14 Armata showing up on the battlefield and did not hear much about it again?

Anyway,If the Russians do keep using Su-57s this would be a good opportunity to gain some information on how they perform in combat for the future.

Good reminder to send the AFU more AD systems, they sure have used Patriot well so far.

I imagine there’s an element of “now we’re getting serious” posturing for internal Russian consumption going on, here.  Perhaps timed to partially counterbalance the current air war narrative of Russian aircraft starting to take noticeably heavier losses.

I also imagine that ‘escort by a flight of Su-34s’ won’t be the only measure they’re taking to be damned sure a shot-down Su-57 isn’t the next thing to hit the headlines.

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, Zeleban said:

The Russian opposition channel Meduza noted the growth rate of money in the accounts of Russians from some regions after the start of the war. The following regions are noted: Tyva, Chechnya, Buryatia, Altai, Dagestan, North Ossetia, Adygea, Mari Earl, Trans-Baikal Territory. Despite the war, Russians are getting richer

 

 

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well some Russians are, but their government…not so much:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_budget_of_Russia

One of the fundamental changes the war has brought is that real money is being spent in the hinterland for the first time in many decades. Before Feb 2022 the Russian states only purpose was to take every single kopeck more than required to stave off starvation from most of Russia and and send it to Moscow for the benefit of the Czar and his courtiers. Most of those courtiers probably wished the provincials would drink themselves to death faster, so even more could be extracted. The war has fundamentally changed this money flow around, now military recruits from the provinces are the most important resource in the realm, along with whatever Soviet military production capacity hadn't been sold off for scrap. Unfortunately it simply hasn't had time to sink in that perhaps as many as half of these recruits are probably coming back in pieces or not at all. So at the moment the Russian hinterland regards the war as the best thing that has happened to them in forever. The very large question is what happens when the the Czar can't keep recruiting by showering money on desperate lower class men, and has to start press ganging them the old fashioned way.

[Butschi]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

"William Alberque, director of strategy, technology, and arms control at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told the FT that Russia likely has a higher threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine due to fears it would likely "escalate the conflict and lead to direct intervention by the U.S. or U.K."

Heh, maybe the poor weak old West is having a bit more of a deterrent effect than popular opinion on this forum believes.

Of course a major nuclear power bogged down in a losing war and nervous at both ends is not exactly good news either.

Ok, to be fair, this is Kyiv Independent quoting FT, quoting William Alberque who said that the threshold is likely higher. After FT saying that Russian papers say that the threshold is actually much lower than expected.

[The_Capt]

9 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Ok, to be fair, this is Kyiv Independent quoting FT, quoting William Alberque who said that the threshold is likely higher. After FT saying that Russian papers say that the threshold is actually much lower than expected.

I think Alberque is saying that there is a different threshold for Ukraine due to threat of western response.  Pretty much the same boat we are in.  No one in the Washington or Moscow wants to die over South East Ukraine...it might be one of the few things we agree upon.

[Harmon Rabb]

Source:Pentagon considering tapping last source of Ukraine military funding as Congress stalls on additional aid (CNN)

Edited February 28 by Harmon Rabb

[Kinophile]

 

 

[Harmon Rabb]

Quote

Bulgarian Defense Minister Todor Tagarev announced the delivery of 100 armored personnel carriers (APC) "in a few days," the Bulgarian channel BTV reported on Feb. 28.

"The armored personnel carriers are still in Sofia. They will be transferred in a few days, but I will not say the precise dates," Tagarev said.

The Bulgarian parliament approved the supply of 100 armored vehicles from the Interior Ministry's stocks to Ukraine last December, together with armaments and spare parts, free of charge. The decision to send the APCs had to override a veto by Bulgarian President Rumen Radev.

The delivery of armored vehicles was previously delayed due to high shipping costs. Tagarev said the Bulgarian side waited for NATO partners to help with the expenditures for transport.

The Bulgarian defense minister also said Bulgaria has already provided Ukraine with $47 million in aid.

Bulgaria and Ukraine agreed on armored personnel carriers' delivery in July 2023 after Bulgarian Prime Minister Nikolai Denkov met with President Volodymyr Zelensky in Bucharest.

According to Denkov, the Bulgarian Armed Forces had never used these APCs as its soldiers had not had the required training.

Bulgaria has become increasingly supportive of Ukraine as the war has progressed. Denkov's government took a decisively pro-Kyiv stance and committed arms supplies to Ukraine despite opposition from Radev.

Bulgarian defense minister: Bulgaria to send 100 armored vehicles to Ukraine 'in few days'(KyivIndependent)

[billbindc]

9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, it is one of the only things Russia, as a state, does really well.  That and giving people heart attacks and fatal falls.

The really successful operations have always been the ones where the tool isn't aware it is being used.  During the 2016 elections here in the US there were documented incidents of Russian agents organizing Black Lives Matter protests using Facebook and other social media.  The people going out to protest were doing so of their own free will and were not paid, but what they didn't know is Russian agents helped get the protest organized according to the Kremlin's agenda.  And don't even get me started on what Russia does to fuel the paranoid right!

It is a race to see if Climate Change or social media kills off our species before AI does.

Steve

Nothing new here: https://www.amazon.com/Compatriots-Chaotic-History-Russias-Émigrés/dp/154173016X

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

So as we have discussed at length. Sanctions do work, but not how most people think.  They apply strategic pressure over time while eroding the overall Russian economy.  Further they will make it harder for Russia to rebuild after this:

Exactly.  An analogy that just came to mind is going on a lengthy car ride with a hard time limit on arrival time.  The more time you have allocated for the trip, the more likely you are going to make it on time.  But then traffic, bad weather, a missed exit, etc. add up.  The closer you get to the hard limit the more problematic little issues become. Now even a series of red lights may decide whether you make it or not.

Russia is still taking its journey, but it's made so many mistakes along the way that it's lost all of its wiggle room.  Sanctions have ensured that everything Russia does is more difficult and/or more costly than before the war.  EVERYTHING.  Yes, they can still keep going, but it is costing them more and sanctions have ensured they are taking in less.

Pointing out that this or that oligarch is getting rich off this war is pointless in isolation.  The Krupp family did very well in both WW1 and WW2, but Germany itself?  Not so much.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Nothing new here: https://www.amazon.com/Compatriots-Chaotic-History-Russias-Émigrés/dp/154173016X

I'm sure that is a delightful read

The thing about the "Red Scare" McCarthyism in the US is that it was rooted in fact.  The Soviets really were out to get us and they really were subverting American society through subtle means.  The problem was the response to the real threat wasn't designed for that purpose. It was, as we call it today, an excuse to wage a "culture war", consolidate power, and provide a vehicle for self enrichment.  A typical Populist ploy which, obviously, we're seeing in action in a number of Western countries lately.

Steve

[sburke]

16 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Sanctions have ensured that everything Russia does is more difficult and/or more costly than before the war.  EVERYTHING.  Yes, they can still keep going, but it is costing them more and sanctions have ensured they are taking in less.

Pointing out that this or that oligarch is getting rich off this war is pointless in isolation.  The Krupp family did very well in both WW1 and WW2, but Germany itself?  Not so much.

Steve

On that note

China Deals Major Blow to Russia with Payments Ban (msn.com)

Russians have reported issues using China's payment system UnionPay, which was widely touted in Russia as an alternative to Visa and Mastercard after the card payment companies pulled out over the war in Ukraine.

UnionPay cards linked to the Huawei Pay service have stopped working in Russia, local news portal 66.ru reported on Tuesday, citing users who say they have been unable to make payments. The Moscow Times said that the restrictions may be the result of U.S. sanctions against Russia's National Payment Card System (NSPK), which processes all UnionPay card transactions in the country.

 

[FancyCat]

Legitimizing nuclear weapons use in conflicts is something that was well hashed during the earlier period Russia was saber rattling, if you recall, China smacked Russia for it. Whatever Russian threats or desire to decisively influence Ukraine in their favour, no nation, not China, not India, nor the West wants the barrier for tactical nuclear weapons use to be loosened.

So I expect U.S warnings that we will escalate in Ukraine with U.S lives via air campaign if nuclear weapons are used to be true. I'm sure China has definitely indicated that Russia will get no support in such a situation. India as well.

[FancyCat]

Speaking of sanctions, FT article on the wrecking of Russia's Gazprom. https://www.ft.com/content/e1b65044-1a97-429a-b1e2-c337a343ec2a

Gazprom, Russia's jewel of natural gas and a lifeline to European influence is now unprofitable, and well on its way to racking up losses. Nordstream wiped out 40% of Russia's export capacity to Europe. The vaunted China pipeline is still under negotiations and would take years to build, requiring state investment (! Without European profits to fund Gazprom, they can no longer fund Russian state tax revenue)

Quote

The EU has proved more adept at sourcing alternative gas than many thought possible — Russia’s share of the bloc’s gas imports dropped from more than 40 per cent in 2021 to 8 per cent last year, according to EU data — while prices have collapsed from their peaks in the early days of the war. The EU is aiming to eliminate all imports of Russian fossil fuels by 2027.

With its main export business in tatters, Gazprom has sought to find new buyers but its deals in central Asia and minor supply boosts to China and Turkey will compensate for only 5 per cent to 10 per cent of the lost European market, according to Salikhov.

Meanwhile, while Russian liquefied natural gas exports are gradually increasing, they remain a fraction of the prewar pipeline deliveries. Novatek accounts for most of Russia’s LNG exports, with Gazprom lacking the specialised infrastructure to convert and transport the liquid form of the fuel, having bet on pipelines rather than liquefaction technologies at the dawn of the Putin era.

 

 

[Butschi]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I think Alberque is saying that there is a different threshold for Ukraine due to threat of western response.  Pretty much the same boat we are in.  No one in the Washington or Moscow wants to die over South East Ukraine...it might be one of the few things we agree upon.

It helps to read the FT directly instead of the somewhat cherry-picked excerpt, I think.

https://www.ft.com/content/f18e6e1f-5c3d-4554-aee5-50a730b306b7

While it says, e.g.

Quote

“This is the first time that we have seen documents like this reported in the public domain,” said Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.”

the whole article is more about a possible conflict with a nucelar power, China in particular, than Ukraine. The longer version of the Alberque quote:

Quote

Alberque said Russia would probably have a higher threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine, which does not have its own nuclear capability or the ability to launch a ground invasion on the same scale, than against China or the US. Russian leaders believe that, whereas a nuclear strike against China or the US could be “soberising”, a nuclear strike on Ukraine would be likely to escalate the conflict and lead to direct intervention by the US or UK, Alberque said. “That is absolutely the last thing Putin wants.”

 

Edited February 28 by Butschi

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

I'm sure that is a delightful read

The thing about the "Red Scare" McCarthyism in the US is that it was rooted in fact.  The Soviets really were out to get us and they really were subverting American society through subtle means.  The problem was the response to the real threat wasn't designed for that purpose. It was, as we call it today, an excuse to wage a "culture war", consolidate power, and provide a vehicle for self enrichment.  A typical Populist ploy which, obviously, we're seeing in action in a number of Western countries lately.

Steve

I've met the authors. Great scholars who have taken huge risks and lost much to keep going. Now in London because arrest in Russia was imminent. All their books are well worth the money. 

[The_Capt]

6 minutes ago, Butschi said:

It helps to read the FT directly instead of the somewhat cherry-picked excerpt, I think.

https://www.ft.com/content/f18e6e1f-5c3d-4554-aee5-50a730b306b7

While it says, e.g.

the whole article is more about a possible conflict with a nucelar power, China in particular, than Ukraine. The longer version of the Alberque quote:

 

Don’t have a subscription.  It appears there are different calculus for defensive vs offensive operations at play as well.  Defensive the conventional metrics appear to align with “red lines” designed to re-establish norms and exert deterrence.  Offensively they would likely need to be some sort of existential pre-emption.

Of course none of these have actually been tested.  Based on these papers, Russia is one major surface vessel away from nuclear release?  Could be another reason the Russian government keeps claiming “accidents”, so they do not get trapped by their own policies.

Interesting to note they are nervous about China.  That whole relationship is just weird.  At the same time they are doing combined joint exercises and military cooperation.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

I'm sure that is a delightful read

The thing about the "Red Scare" McCarthyism in the US is that it was rooted in fact.  The Soviets really were out to get us and they really were subverting American society through subtle means.  The problem was the response to the real threat wasn't designed for that purpose. It was, as we call it today, an excuse to wage a "culture war", consolidate power, and provide a vehicle for self enrichment.  A typical Populist ploy which, obviously, we're seeing in action in a number of Western countries lately.

Steve

The entire communist system was (and is) terrifying to those who hold all the power and money.  It is a massive redistribution of wealth scheme.  Of course it did not work and simply made welfare states and new elites.  But hard capitalism, while definitely can build things, tends to create wealth divides which eventually come apart at the seams.  

During the Cold War this whole subversive under play was going on all the time.  Some of it was laughable, while other times it was terrifying.  Of course we are living through our own version of this today.

[Vet 0369]

2 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Source:Pentagon considering tapping last source of Ukraine military funding as Congress stalls on additional aid (CNN)

The big question I have is what happened to all the Abrams and 155mm long-range Arty from when the Commandant restructured the USMC. Were they transferred to the Army in case Canada or Mexico attack us, or Russia arracks U.S. across the Bering Straites? Why can’t those weapons be sent to Ukraine?

[Lethaface]

2 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

The big question I have is what happened to all the Abrams and 155mm long-range Arty from when the Commandant restructured the USMC. Were they transferred to the Army in case Canada or Mexico attack us, or Russia arracks U.S. across the Bering Straites? Why can’t those weapons be sent to Ukraine?

Because Scholz won't send Taurus ;-).

[kimbosbread]

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Don’t have a subscription.

FT Digital used to be $99 per annum 2 years ago. Looks like it is almost $300 now!???

Highly recommended still; they have an excellent gardening column if nothing else.

[Battlefront.com]

As much as I loath the guy... having Mitch McConnell waive the white flag and surrender to Trumppublicans is not good for anybody, least of all Ukraine:

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4494536-mcconnell-to-step-down-as-senate-gop-leader/

Steve

[Kinophile]

 

 

[Butschi]

47 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Don’t have a subscription.

Oh, me neither. I just googled "financial times leaked russian papers nuclear" and the article was (and is) accessible. The link I posted isn't, though... strange.