Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Pickman's model]

Seems clear that USA is setting the agenda and other NATO countries are finding their place within it, no?
This is standard

No.

 

[ska invita]

No.

fascinating post as per

 

[UnderOpenSky]

High cost, focus on counterinsurgency at the time, it not being exported apparently.

Yes true. I'm mean how many super advanced air superiority fighters do you actually need.

 

[Cid]

Yes true. I'm mean how many super advanced air superiority fighters do you actually need.

187 apparently.

 

[JimW]

Yes true. I'm mean how many super advanced air superiority fighters do you actually need.

It's the parking stops me.

 

[ska invita]

Mainly I just object to their being some kind of big NATO plan, when it is more likely there are big disagreements and heated meetings within NATO at the moment.

of course theres a NATO strategy, this is a military organisation. Disagreements will arise but the strongest elements within it will lead the planning as usual.

There's endless evidence of it ....this is an example from a link posted on this thread just yesterday:

"Early last year Western allies agreed an “unwritten policy” not to supply Ukraine with a fully comprehensive package of weapons immediately after the invasion, out of fear “we would trigger a big response from Russia,” ...
“Many countries in the West think that if we were to supply Ukraine with all the hardware they asked us [for] in the first phase of the war, there would be a strong Russian reaction, including nuclear. You may call this a process of getting [Putin] accustomed,”
Washington has told Kyiv that supplying aircraft is a “no-go, for the moment,....There’s a red line there"

sounds like planning to me, and thats comments made publicly. real planning work will be going on in secret

 

[Cid]

of course theres a NATO strategy, this is a military organisation. Disagreements will arise but the strongest elements within it will lead the planning as usual.

There's endless evidence of it ....this is an example from a link posted on this thread just yesterday:

"Early last year Western allies agreed an “unwritten policy” not to supply Ukraine with a fully comprehensive package of weapons immediately after the invasion, out of fear “we would trigger a big response from Russia,” ...
“Many countries in the West think that if we were to supply Ukraine with all the hardware they asked us [for] in the first phase of the war, there would be a strong Russian reaction, including nuclear. You may call this a process of getting [Putin] accustomed,”
Washington has told Kyiv that supplying aircraft is a “no-go, for the moment,....There’s a red line there"

sounds like planning to me, and thats comments made publicly. real planning work will be going on in secret

Would you call that a 'plan'?

 

[ska invita]

Would you call that a 'plan'?

as I said" thats comments made publicly. real planning work will be going on in secret"
theres clear coherent coordination throughout
how can NATO not have a strategy?
I dont understand the suggestion of it at all.

 

[Cid]

as I said" thats comments made publicly. real planning work will be going on in secret"
theres clear coherent coordination throughout
how can NATO not have a strategy?
I dont understand the idea of it at all.

Sure, I imagine most powers accept the logic of trying not to escalate conflict with nuclear powers. And then of course there are strategies within that... where I think your take falls down is that there's some coherent US-lead plan, rather than a set of competing and evolving plans within a broadly similar framework.

 

[The39thStep]

It's very important that proper funding is given to these sort of schemes

How Ukrainian refugees are handling cultural integration in ethnically diverse areas of the UK via @darshnasoni

 

[ska invita]

... where I think your take falls down is that there's some coherent US-lead plan, rather than a set of competing and evolving plans within a broadly similar framework.

what are the competing plans? the impression im getting from following this is that NATO members with influence and power are broadly on the same page, there's a lot of agreement. The logical options for NATO don't lead to many options.... I have been pushing back against the popular notion on here of a total win ( return to Ukrainian borders) as it hasn't as yet been an explicit enacted one from NATO, rather it's been one of containment of the occupied territories.

This is the best recent summary of the current US led position imo

The US must decide what ‘victory’ means in Ukraine – or waste even more lives there | Frank Ledwidge

Its support is critical to the conflict, but the US is failing to learn the lessons of its sprawling wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, says former military officer Frank Ledwidge

www.theguardian.com

 

[Pickman's model]

fascinating post as per

yeh well when i'm getting off the bus you're not going to get a long and involved post

 

[kebabking]

Seems clear that USA is setting the agenda and other NATO countries are finding their place within it, no?
Standard

Only if you're not paying attention to other states, and focusing on the US because you start from the position that it's the US driving policy, because that suits your world view.

It's actually the eastern states that are the drivers - Poland being both one of the most forward leaning and the one that controls what does, and what doesn't go into Ukraine. It's the US that had - consistently - to keep up with the Eastern states. The Eastern states are the ones in NATO with the 'moral weight', because they have been warning about Russia for 20 years while everyone else took Russian money and obsessed about China - now, they they speak, everyone is silent. When others speak, they get interrupted.

Standard stuff, thinking that everything is about the US,and ignoring, or denying, the agency of everyone else.

 

[Pickman's model]

Only if you're not paying attention to other states, and focusing on the US because you start from the position that it's the US driving policy, because that suits your world view.

It's actually the eastern states that are the drivers - Poland being both one of the most forward leaning and the one that controls what does, and what doesn't go into Ukraine. It's the US that had - consistently - to keep up with the Eastern states. The Eastern states are the ones in NATO with the 'moral weight', because they have been warning about Russia for 20 years while everyone else took Russian money and obsessed about China - now, they they speak, everyone is silent. When others speak, they get interrupted.

Standard stuff, thinking that everything is about the US,and ignoring, or denying, the agency of everyone else.

not to mention eg the great activity in turkey sending drones to ukraine. turkey's involvement in the accession of sweden and finland. and the elephant in the room, russia's influence on proceedings, they've delayed certain weapons being offered through the fear of escalation. so as you say it's not the americans set the pace.

 

[Spymaster]

Seems clear that USA is setting the agenda and other NATO countries are finding their place within it ...

Clear as mud.

 

[ska invita]

yeh well when i'm getting off the bus you're not going to get a long and involved post

im commuting too - #urbanskillz

Only if you're not paying attention to other states, and focusing on the US because you start from the position that it's the US driving policy, because that suits your world view.

It's actually the eastern states that are the drivers - Poland being both one of the most forward leaning and the one that controls what does, and what doesn't go into Ukraine. It's the US that had - consistently - to keep up with the Eastern states. The Eastern states are the ones in NATO with the 'moral weight', because they have been warning about Russia for 20 years while everyone else took Russian money and obsessed about China - now, they they speak, everyone is silent. When others speak, they get interrupted.

Standard stuff, thinking that everything is about the US,and ignoring, or denying, the agency of everyone else.

This the same US that has been pushing NATO east since the fall of the USSR and pushing for an anti-Russian missile shield on Polish soil, .... or this

Increasing the US military presence in Poland - Ministry of National Defence - Gov.pl website

Polish-American relations have a key impact on NATO's security system, especially its eastern flank. The deployed to Poland Armored Brigade Combat Group subunits and supporting elements, including the Combat Aviation Brigade, the installation of a missile defense system in Redzikowo, equipment...

www.gov.pl

the scales have just fallen from their eyes and they've just begun to see Russia as a competing threat? Pull the other one.
Poland cant do anything without US approval
This is a matter of pure power, im surprised this is contentious

It's the US that had - consistently - to keep up with the Eastern states.

If anything its acting as a break, at the speed it wants, crucially not enough to truly push Russia out (at present)

 

[Dystopiary]

It's very important that proper funding is given to these sort of schemes

How Ukrainian refugees are handling cultural integration in ethnically diverse areas of the UK via @darshnasoni

That was interesting and positive, an important project, thanks for posting about it. I think it's important not to typecast Ukrainians too though; Ukraine is more ethnically diverse than a lot of people realise. I've seen so many comments on twitter this morning dismissing Ukrainians as all just racist. Quite a bit of it smells like anti-Ukrainian pro-Kremlin propaganda.

This is a fairly new project set up by a Ukrainian woman of colour, Alice Zhuravel, which is to amplify the voices of Ukrainian people of colour and show the diversity of Ukrainians:

Tozhsamist Diversity (English version)

Alice Zhuravel on twitter

A Ukrainian who I follow on twitter who talks about race, ethnicity and diversity, amongst other things, in Ukraine is Mariam Naiem.

This was a thread she wrote on myths and reality about nationalism, neo-nazism and racism in Ukraine:

on Thread Reader

original post on twitter

 

[Pickman's model]

of course theres a NATO strategy, this is a military organisation. Disagreements will arise but the strongest elements within it will lead the planning as usual.

There's endless evidence of it ....this is an example from a link posted on this thread just yesterday:

"Early last year Western allies agreed an “unwritten policy” not to supply Ukraine with a fully comprehensive package of weapons immediately after the invasion, out of fear “we would trigger a big response from Russia,” ...
“Many countries in the West think that if we were to supply Ukraine with all the hardware they asked us [for] in the first phase of the war, there would be a strong Russian reaction, including nuclear. You may call this a process of getting [Putin] accustomed,”
Washington has told Kyiv that supplying aircraft is a “no-go, for the moment,....There’s a red line there"

sounds like planning to me, and thats comments made publicly. real planning work will be going on in secret

somewhere the leading role you attributed to the united states has gone er awol

 

[A380]

im commuting too - #urbanskillz


This the same US that has been pushing NATO east since the fall of the USSR and pushing for an anti-Russian missile shield on Polish soil, .... or this

Increasing the US military presence in Poland - Ministry of National Defence - Gov.pl website

Polish-American relations have a key impact on NATO's security system, especially its eastern flank. The deployed to Poland Armored Brigade Combat Group subunits and supporting elements, including the Combat Aviation Brigade, the installation of a missile defense system in Redzikowo, equipment...

www.gov.pl

the scales have just fallen from their eyes and they've just begun to see Russia as a competing threat? Pull the other one.
Poland cant do anything without US approval
This is a matter of pure power, im surprised this is contentious

If anything its acting as a break, at the speed it wants, crucially not enough to truly push Russia out (at present)

I always find it interesting that people on the left who most oppose aspects of Capital (NATO, 'The Goverment' the EU, The Old Bill or just generally 'The Establishment' ) often credit the people within those organisations with astounding efficiency, effectiveness and superhuman competence. It's close to the 'sane' end of conspiracy theories.

The idea, for example, that NATO is a monolithic block with a leadership that marches in lockstep (did you see what I did there) to a planned and coherent strategy worked out in fine detail years in advance with no external political factors of states, organisations and individuals jockeying for individual advantage would be comforting if true but, I suspect, a million miles from reality.

 

[Pickman's model]

I always find it interesting that people on the left who most oppose aspects of Capital (NATO, 'The Goverment' the EU, The Old Bill or just generally 'The Establishment' ) often credit the people within those organisations with astounding efficiency, effectiveness and superhuman competence. It's close to the 'sane' end of conspiracy theories.

The idea, for example, that NATO is a monolithic block with a leadership that marches in lockstep (did you see what I did there) to a planned and coherent strategy worked out in fine detail years in advance with no external political factors of states, organisations and individuals jockeying for individual advantage would be comforting if true but, I suspect, a million miles from reality.

yeh nato can't even get all its members to pay the agreed minimum for their defence budgets but they can meet in secret conclave and plan things out years in advance. right.

 

[The39thStep]

Only if you're not paying attention to other states, and focusing on the US because you start from the position that it's the US driving policy, because that suits your world view.

It's actually the eastern states that are the drivers - Poland being both one of the most forward leaning and the one that controls what does, and what doesn't go into Ukraine. It's the US that had - consistently - to keep up with the Eastern states. The Eastern states are the ones in NATO with the 'moral weight', because they have been warning about Russia for 20 years while everyone else took Russian money and obsessed about China - now, they they speak, everyone is silent. When others speak, they get interrupted.

Standard stuff, thinking that everything is about the US,and ignoring, or denying, the agency of everyone else.

I don't think it's a contradiction to say that the US has been an uncontested leader of the Alliance and an informal grouping of big Allies has dominated most crucial NATO decisions and at the same time to say this has not meant that the smaller Allies would not at certain times have influence within NATO.

I think you are absolutely right in identifying the Eastern States, at this moment in time, as being key to or at least influencing shaping the agenda. It was they that forced the tanks issue and Scholtz's comment last year on the centre of Europe shifting eastwards was not just about the future expansion of the EU .

However, I am not convinced that they would be in that position if it wasn't for US support within NATO. The struggle to keep up, as you describe it, in my view is more of a case about assessing the opportunities and risks about who the US are seen to be backing, how they should back, and the likelihood of outcomes.

Somewhere in that mix you've got to add that whilst France and Germany have traditionally hugely influenced the EU agenda and despite the fact that the EU has put more money into Ukraine than the US that their influence in NATO at this moment is questionable . The Eastern European states are not big fans of the idea of independent European defence that was mooted by Macron and has some support within the EU. and that suits the US. Its also worth noting that the EU have laid off the criticisms they had of both Hungary and Poland probably because of the key strategic border position that you describe.

 

[The39thStep]

That was interesting and positive, an important project, thanks for posting about it. I think it's important not to typecast Ukrainians too though; Ukraine is more ethnically diverse than a lot of people realise. I've seen so many comments on twitter this morning dismissing Ukrainians as all just racist. Quite a bit of it smells like anti-Ukrainian pro-Kremlin propaganda.

This is a fairly new project set up by a Ukrainian woman of colour, Alice Zhuravel, which is to amplify the voices of Ukrainian people of colour and show the diversity of Ukrainians:

Tozhsamist Diversity (English version)

Alice Zhuravel on twitter

A Ukrainian who I follow on twitter who talks about race, ethnicity and diversity, amongst other things, in Ukraine is Mariam Naiem.

This was a thread she wrote on myths and reality about nationalism, neo-nazism and racism in Ukraine:

on Thread Reader

original post on twitter

When the last Labour government was in office and had a policy interest in community cohesion ( mainly over immigration, far right extremism and Islamic extremism) I went to a conference that had a seminar on racism and Polish immigrants. A lot of the issues described in the Channel 4 clip were similar, to be honest.

The thing that made me laugh ( probably shouldn't really ) was when that woman said that she had come from a nice place in Ukraine and ended up in Birmingham

 

[A380]

...

The thing that made me laugh ( probably shouldn't really ) was when that woman said that she had come from a nice place in Ukraine and ended up in Birmingham

Insert blasted detroyed dystopian wasteland gag here.

 

[The39thStep]

I always find it interesting that people on the left who most oppose aspects of Capital (NATO, 'The Goverment' the EU, The Old Bill or just generally 'The Establishment' ) often credit the people within those organisations with astounding efficiency, effectiveness and superhuman competence. It's close to the 'sane' end of conspiracy theories.

The idea, for example, that NATO is a monolithic block with a leadership that marches in lockstep (did you see what I did there) to a planned and coherent strategy worked out in fine detail years in advance with no external political factors of states, organisations and individuals jockeying for individual advantage would be comforting if true but, I suspect, a million miles from reality.

I blame the lack of Marxists tbh . Marx's critique of capital and capitalism was actually that in its goal of maximising profit it was inherently chaotic, crisis prone and full of competitive
contradictions. But as many have pointed out on here ' that's all out of date'.

 

[A380]

I blame the lack of Marxists tbh . Marx's critique of capital and capitalism was actually that it in its goal of maximising profit it was inherently chaotic, crisis prone and full of competitive
contradictions. But as many have pointed out on here ' that's all out of date'.

Yeah., Marx complete failed to identify the dialectic between those who own buckets and those who are bucket-less.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yeah., Marx complete failed to identify the dialectic between those who own buckets and those who are bucket-less.

not to mention people who share buckets or own them cooperatively

 

[Dogsauce]

The whole ‘the West and NATO’ having it in for Russia narrative doesn’t really add up when you consider how much the military in Europe has shrunk since the Cold War, and how most of Europe was happily pouring money into the pockets of the belligerent petrostate in return for a reliable gas supply. All this while the Russian state was getting away with murdering people on the territory of Europe and invading neighbouring states. They had it good, with little opposition.

 

[The39thStep]

Yeah., Marx complete failed to identify the dialectic between those who own buckets and those who are bucket-less.

and didn't forsee the tendency of the rate of bucket lists to rise

 

[gosub]

I think there are two - pictures of destruction inside Mother Russia might start a spiral of panic/reaction inside Putins circle. Having to be seen to react to that with huge force is one of the prerequisites of the nationalist strongman. Which of course could have some very negative outcomes...

The other is that it's a ballistic missile - it goes straight up, and it would look to someone who saw it on radar like the kind of ballistic missiles that Russia puts nukes on. The downside of Ru media and govt putting deranged shit on the news every night for years is that at some point, people will start to believe it - even the people parroting it.

There is still a fear of scaring Putin. If Russia loses, or really starts to look like it's losing, then his future is bleak - we already know he's paranoid, we already know he's quite capable of grabbing the wrong end of the stick, and we already know he's very thin skinned about how he is perceived within Russia and by outsiders - and that he has a history of escalating when he hits a problem.

As much as I think ending this is possible while Putin is alive just as likely to get a Staffenburg as they are a Donitz as a replacement

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

NATO protects the western hegemony, way of life, world order. If Ukraine could just drive Russia back to their pre-Feb 2022 or 2014 borders that would leave Putin to fanny it out and stay in power to continue his shit and re-arm and go again. If Ukraine is then pulled in to NATO it will be some other country.

The other risk is serious escalation making Vlad reach for the nukes.

A drawn out conflict works better for NATO, avoids the escalation/nukes scenario and also degrades Russia’s military to such an extent that it will be good for shite for a generation or more.

This will also achieve the aim of telling China to wind their neck in.

So it is a proxy war in that regard, but at the same time it is what is claimed; arming Ukraine in order for it to defend itself from the aggressor.

Or something like that, maybe.