Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

Its a bit late and Im tired so I might have forgotten something really obvious, but right now I'm a little bit confused by this bit in a John Simpson piece:




My confusion is, whats actually missing from Russias demands mentioned in the piece that we would have expected to be included?

As others have said, seems odd. But I suppose that there is nothing about regime change in Ukraine and nothing about agreeing not to join the EU?
 
From the above:

Chief among them is an acceptance by Ukraine that it should be neutral and should not apply to join Nato. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky has already conceded this.

A concession I believe its enough for Putin to claim a victory and stay in power, Understandable that Zelensky would agree to this and it anything that saves further bloodshed should be done, but not something many of those who have lost family to the Russians will take kindly to Imo
 
The thing about Ukraine being "neutral" has never been defined though, what that actually means.
No NATO is one thing but as everyone knows it was never going to happen anytime remotely soon anyway. I can't see how an agreement can be reached that does not include guarantees from other countries to protect Ukraine next time Russia decides to invade it, and is that "neutrality" idk, depends if Putin is just looking to declare victory or not. I see no sign that he's just looking to save whats left of his face.
 
From the above:



A concession I believe its enough for Putin to claim a victory and stay in power, Understandable that Zelensky would agree to this and it anything that saves further bloodshed should be done, but not something many of those who have lost family to the Russians will take kindly to Imo

Tbf Ukraine has proved it can defend itself adequately from Russia without being in NATO, so this might make it an easier concession to swallow.
 
'Neutral' is a movable feast - Ireland is neutral (well kind of) with military capabilities only marginally greater than your local police force. Finland is also kind of neutral, with an army of 200,000, fast jets, artillery, surface to air missiles etc...

Switzerland is properly neutral, and is tooled up to fuck.

I rather suspect that when Putin says neutral, he means Ukraine being firmly within the Russian sphere of interest, plugged into the Russian electricity grid, no fast jets, a coastguard instead of a Navy, a barely armed and barely existing army, and constitutional links with Russia...
 
'Neutral' is a movable feast - Ireland is neutral (well kind of) with military capabilities only marginally greater than your local police force. Finland is also kind of neutral, with an army of 200,000, fast jets, artillery, surface to air missiles etc...

Switzerland is properly neutral, and is tooled up to fuck.

I rather suspect that when Putin says neutral, he means Ukraine being firmly within the Russian sphere of interest, plugged into the Russian electricity grid, no fast jets, a coastguard instead of a Navy, a barely armed and barely existing army, and constitutional links with Russia...

That might be what Putin wants but perhaps if the reports are accurate that the Russian army is really struggling he may now think its not achievable?
 
'Neutral' is a movable feast - Ireland is neutral (well kind of) with military capabilities only marginally greater than your local police force. Finland is also kind of neutral, with an army of 200,000, fast jets, artillery, surface to air missiles etc...

Switzerland is properly neutral, and is tooled up to fuck.

I rather suspect that when Putin says neutral, he means Ukraine being firmly within the Russian sphere of interest, plugged into the Russian electricity grid, no fast jets, a coastguard instead of a Navy, a barely armed and barely existing army, and constitutional links with Russia...

And the entire Ukrainian Black Sea coast controlled by Russia
 
Not exactly directly related, but just a thought, does Putin needing to use military force to secure his interests in Ukraine suggest that the accounts about sophisticated Russian techniques to influence public opinion in Europe and the US are in fact complete bollocks?
 
I assume any break for hostilities results in both sides frantically rearming at this point and Ukraine applying for NATO on the sly.


Plus minor attempts at civil war as power struggles ensue.
 
Not exactly directly related, but just a thought, does Putin needing to use military force to secure his interests in Ukraine suggest that the accounts about sophisticated Russian techniques to influence public opinion in Europe and the US are in fact complete bollocks?

The techniques exist for sure, but it is questionable how much influence they have on electoral outcomes. Not really something falsifiable so we will never have a good answer for that.

My guess is they may have some slight influence but probably not decisive.
 
That might be what Putin wants but perhaps if the reports are accurate that the Russian army is really struggling he may now think its not achievable?
Yeah thats the question i think, has he adjusted his original aims to fit the circumstances or not. But if he was really just looking for a way out of the fuckup he could have done it already, declared victory instead of making terrifying speeches about purifying the nation.
 
Similar point made by Jacobin magazine To Help Ukraine, Cancel Its Foreign Debt
Main points:
  • In 2021 8.5 percent of state expenditure was on debt
  • average wages are below five hundred euros per month
  • ranked eighth in the world in terms of labor migration
  • Under IMF pressure, after 2014, gas prices increased six-fold
  • "Ukraine was obliged to pay creditors 15 percent of its GDP increase over 3 percent, and 40 percent of each percent of its GDP increase over 4 percent." So, its GDP increases are being gobbled up by re-servicing debt.
 
Not exactly directly related, but just a thought, does Putin needing to use military force to secure his interests in Ukraine suggest that the accounts about sophisticated Russian techniques to influence public opinion in Europe and the US are in fact complete bollocks?
Dunno about complete bollocks, but I've long felt it has been blown out of all proportion, mostly via the septics' Propaganda machine
 
the Russian MOD twitter account has stopped hiding, is visible again.
It has a video of a "refugee from Mariupol" saying that it was the azov batallion who blew up the theatre where those hundreds of children were sheltering. There are also military briefings, listing how many Ukrainian helicopters and drones etc they claim to have successfully destroyed every day but i'd give them the same credence.
 
Hah, very plausible. If there's one thing you'd expect defenders to do in the middle of a siege it's use copious amounts of the troops' limited explosives to blow up their own side.

Even the Russian MOD social media guys have got to be cringing a bit at being told to try that one on.
 
Maybe they're believed to offer some sort of cushioning protection from sniper fire so the bullets bounce off, like those cope cages on the tanks.
To be fair to the dead generals ,whom gave their life to a folly of a war , as the one pictured up thread they've died in battle fatigues rather the rediculous dress uniform .

Silly thought more than anything
 
Not going to defend the death penalty, but I don't think it's wildly inconsistent for Schwarzenegger to advocate executing the San Francisco Strangler or the San Diego Decapitator or whoever while also calling for an end to the slaughter of Ukrainian civilians, tbf.

Sure. And FWIW, I think he's doing more good than harm given his global megastar status in Russia.

It's just a shame that the man has actually signed off on executions, somewhat tainting the message a little.
 
I know Elbows has consistently expressed scepticism about claims of wide spread Russian setbacks but so far those claims have been pretty much backed up by subsequent events.
My skepticism is less about whether those setbacks were real, more about the full implication of those setbacks and whether they meant Russia couldnt make more progress in future. And I was especially skeptical when these claims were made at a time when Russian gains could still be seen happening on war maps. Since then the maps have changed little when it comes to the north and Kyiv, and with every day that this remains the case it seems the word 'stalled' gains credibility. There are still limits as to how far I can run with these ideas, but my stance inevitably starts to shift as more estimates of when large Russian action in the north will resume are missed. All the same, I still cannot make confident claims that Russia cannot possibly make more gains in the Kyiv region.
 
Back
Top Bottom