Ukraine: military (Aug '14 to mid-June '15) closed

[OUTLAW 09]

Moderator's Note

I have decided to:


Close the existing main Ukraine (catch all) thread (1991 replies and 99k views) and move all August posts to here
Create two threads for current matters
First the fighting and military aspects - this thread
Secondly the wider non-military context (diplomacy, politicis, economics etc)
The Russian Info Ops thread is now in the Europe arena (ends)





So - duplicity is a trait of a rogue state?

AP---this is a good read as a beginning learner for you--even some inside Russia state close to what I am saying and I am not even Russian.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/siren-call-of-empire-will-wreck-russia/504196.html

[AmericanPride]

Outlaw - I'm still waiting on that definition of "criminal rogue state". You've implied only one characteristic (duplicity). In the international system, what makes a state "criminal" and/or "rogue"?

Not sure how the article furthers the conversation; I've already made the argument that Russia is an empire. I'm inclined to agree with the idea that Russia is a "rogue" state in its behavior as a spoiler and its characteristics as an imperial state; but, alas, you still have not offered a definition of what actually constitutes a "rogue" state.

[Shchors]

Sorry for not replying sooner, but life gets in the way. The situation in East Ukraine has still not resolved to the point that I am able to determine whether the sudden maneuver by the Ukrainian mechanized group that attacked cross-country on July 27 between the key cross-roads town of Debaltseve in the north towards Shakhtarsk in the south has had its intended impact. By the morning hours of July 28th the separatists were able to pry open the east-west roadway in Shakhtarsk and to push back the Ukrainians to both the southern as well as the northern outskirts of the town. Ukrainian losses in armored vehicles due to fighting in urban terrain against short range anti-tank weapons appear to have been fairly heavy. However, Russian claims to have destroyed upwards to 125 vehicles are unconfirmed. Photographic evidence shows a few burnt out BTRs and BMPs. If claims of a modern day Prokhorovka (WWII Battle of Kursk encounter) are to be true, then one would expect video of a field of destroyed tanks by now, but none have appeared in the internet. Even if the Russians have reopened the road towards Luhansk, the road link to the city of Donetsk through Shakhtarsk is tenuous at best; the Ukrainians have the ability to interdict much of the traffic with artillery. Based on accounts by separatist eyewitnesses, a portion of the Ukrainian armored column bisected the east-west road on July 27th and raced southeast to attack Saur-Mohyla mountain from the north; that is from behind of the defenses facing Ukrainian forces to the south (which are currently trapped along the Russian border). However, many armored vehicles were disabled by dense minefields as the Ukrainians attacked up the reverse slope of the mountain. Then the Russians hit them with artillery. Enough infantry dismounted to reach the top in order to seize the mountain, or at least a portion of it. For the last three days, both sides claim to control Saur-Mohyla and concede that the opposite side is fighting very hard to recapture it. According to Ukrainian reports, the separatists are supported by heavy arty and rocket fire from across the border, no more than 8 kilometers to the south. Fresh Ukrainian airborne troops from the 95th brigade and tank support from a company of tanks from the 30th mech brigade are fighting but partially surrounded at Stepanivka, just east of Saur-Mohyla. It seems that any attempt by one side to outflank the other results in a new encirclement. Reportedly, some but not all of the surrounded brigades along the Russian border have been resupplied and a few units have been rotated out and replaced by fresh troops. In an attempt to maintain the initiative, the Ukrainians started a limited offensive to block the same east-west road to Donetsk at Khartsysk, west of their recent breakthrough towards Shakhtarsk and closer to Donetsk. They made some headway (up to Ilyowsk) but are still some 5 kilometers south of the road. Not to be outdone, the separatists have sent long range raiding parties to attack north-east of Debaltseve, to threaten the line of communications of the armored group that attacked recently towards Shakhtarsk. This is a whirlwind campaign where the Ukrainians constantly seek open country for maneuver while the Russians react by forcing the Ukes into positional warfare, preferably in urban terrain. As stated by me previously, all depends on whether the Russians can maintain the rate of reinforcement and resupply over the border near Luhansk (actually towards Krasnodon). One last comment about Outlaw 09's snippet regarding Lt. General Victor Muzhenko, Ukr. Chief of the General Staff, leading the armored maneuver group in a tank. This report is unconfirmed. In the first days of July, when the Ukrainians began this campaign to clear the Donbas, Muzhenko was not Chief of the General Staff. He was merely the commander of the East Ukrainian theater of operations. Reportedly, he led a battalion of the 79th airmobile brigade in an attack up Saur-Mohyla mountain, as a preliminary attack before the Ukrainians sent troops to seal off the border (these three brigades eventually were surrounded and had to dig in). The attack on July 1 to take Saur-Mohyla failed, despite Muzhenko's personal involvement. Perhaps the earlier incident is now mistakenly attributed to the maneuver on Shakhtarsk two days ago. Either way, Muzhenko is quite the "fighting general." The Ukrainians better hope he survives. Muzhenko may be the closest reincarnation of Heinz Guderian, George Patton and/or Ariel Sharon, anywhere today. Where would they be in this war without him?

[Dayuhan]

I think your line of argument opens questions about the long-term consequences for Russia's internal situation. Are sanctions and destabilizing Russia's economy more important than dominating in Ukraine? Is it in the U.S. interest to destablize Russia?

I don't think the US is destabilizing Russia. Putin has to some extent destabilized his own regime by choosing policies that exacerbate the conflict in interests between and among his key constituents. That's his own doing. Why should the US or "the West" refrain from sanctions to protect Putin from the consequences of his own decisions? Putin is not Russia; Russia was there before him and will be there after him. If Putin steps in a pile of merde and destabilizes his own government, so it goes. The US doesn't need to clean his boots.

I think it's safe to conclude that Putin doesn't want to invade the Eastern Ukraine: if he wanted to do it he'd have done it a long time ago. He certainly doesn't want the Ukraine to win the east back. He put his faith in proxies, and the proxies haven't delivered. Now he has to choose between two unwanted outcomes, both of which have negative consequences. That situation is his own doing, and the choice is up to him to make.

Russia is increasingly isolated. If the Ukraine emerges from this with a pro-western government, Putin's only ally on his Western border will be Lukashenko, who is as much liability as asset. In the south the 'Stans are increasingly falling into the Chinese economic orbit. Those events are not about "the West" or China undermining Russia, they are about former Russian satellites asserting their own sovereignty and choosing their own alliances on the basis of their own perceived interests. It's absurd to say that the Baltic States, the Ukraine, or even Belarus "must" stay in the Russian orbit because Russia wants a buffer zone. To make that claim would be to deny that these are sovereign states. If the Kazakhs or Turkmen get better deals on gas and investments from China, why shouldn't they deal with China? If Eastern Europe sees connection to the West as more advantageous to them then connection to Russia, why shouldn't they connect to the West? If Russia wants to retain its influence in these areas, they need to learn how to pursue policies of attraction (not a Russian strong point, I fear) and to make their friendship more desirable than that of their rivals. Of course the Russians can pretend that this erosion of influence is caused by devious machinations of great power rivals. They can even believe their own pretense. That's not going to reverse the erosion.

The US can't "win" in the Ukraine because the US isn't a direct party to the conflict. The Ukraine is fighting for its sovereign right to determine its own alliances and policies. Of course the US would prefer to see the Ukraine win, but it's not the US that's fighting, and framing the conflict as the US vs Russia is not, I think, very helpful.

Whether or not "the World" needs Russia is to me irrelevant. Russia exists, and must be dealt with to some extent.

[OUTLAW 09]

So - duplicity is a trait of a rogue state?

AP----let's take the Wikipedia definition as a starting point.

Rogue state is a controversial term applied by some international theorists to states they consider threatening to the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria, such as being ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction.

1. Ruled by authoritarian regime---would argue that Putin with the new anti Maidan and internet laws has in fact established an authoritarian regime
2. Sponsor terrorism—would argue that the initial Georgia and Moldavian adventures started out as “terrorist” activities against ethnic Russians—was really a false flag used as the geo political reasoning for armed invasions, Crimea was in fact along the same lines and one could in fact define the sending of irregular/mercenary manpower/weapons into eastern Ukraine as both terroristic in nature and or an armed irregular invasion
3. Proliferation of WMD—one can in fact argue that weapons such as the BMs 21/27 used against civilian targets are in fact WMD, one can argue the use of a Buk missile system to down a civilian airliner killing 298 is in fact WMD, one could argue by using irregular/mercenaries inside another country and randomly well maybe not so randomly killing, torturing, pillaging/plundering and destroying key infrastructure as WMD

Heck AP we define a home made bomb in Boston as WMD these days so why not a Buk or BM 21/27?

A common presumption applied to rogue states is that they do not necessarily behave rationally or in their own best interests. In political theory it is generally believed that a stable nation, ruled by a leadership that is subject to broad scrutiny (though not necessarily democratic scrutiny), will tend to act in its own best interests and will not take actions that are directly contrary to its own interests, particularly not to its own survival. Rogue states, however, may not be subject to this assumption and, as such, relations with them may be more complicated and unpredictable.

Would argue that Russia has not acted rationally since the Georgia events –actually even before that in their direct violation of the INF. Why did they violate the INF—it came out yesterday in a number of press releases after the US charges—the treaty hurts Russia, the treaty is not good for Russia etc. The underlying assumption by the hardliners is ---that was done under weak SU leaders and we are strong thus want to change it now.

We can go further back and look at their violation of the OSCE treaties they signed for the destruction of a set amount of tanks and APCs—they argued to the OSCE that they could not accomplish it due to the ongoing jihadi issues in the ‘stans. But that was over eight years ago and no one has called them on it.

Those OSCE scheduled to be destroyed T64s that Russia agreed to are now fighting in eastern Ukraine.

Then we can look at how their violated the Memorandum on the Ukraine which they signed.

If you really look deeper into these events you will find a single argument—these agreements were done by weak SU leaders in a weak period of the SU and that hurt the new Russia so therefore we no longer hold to them.

NOTE: Stalin one said at a private high level CP meeting---yes we will sign treaties and agreements but and this is critical but we can/will change them when we want to in order to fit the new environment. AP see the continuance of thoughts from Stalin until 2014? So AP then what treaties/agreements that Russia has signed since 1994 do they hold to be valid now in 2014 or better yet will in fact Russia hold to any treaty they sign based on past performance?

The follow on assumption then is we the "new Russia" do not think that former leaders of the SU concluded a “good deal” for the now Russia so therefore we will do what we want to restore the now Russia to renewed superpower status.

Was and or is that not the argument Putin used in annexing the Crimea in a number of his statement just before and after the annexation and still is using when he talks about never giving back the Crimea?

This whole argument about NATO enlargement is a smokescreen and has always been a smokescreen as well as the argument about containment has been a smokescreen since the 60s. It is a smokescreen that allows for increasing their military and strengthening their internal authoritarian population controls.

Since 1994, countries in Europe were free to go their separate ways and conclude agreements that were beneficial to their populations—now we have rouge nation who is redefining the concept of ethnicity/culture/language as a smokescreen for imperialistic nationalistic expansion under the guise of “we want to play again with the big boys” BUT we do not want to play “big boy games” meaning accept responsibility for our actions in the international relations game.

Did you notice that in both the Korean airliner shot down and now MH17 the then SU and now Russia has in fact copied the exact playbook—“ain’t our responsibly” even if somehow someone ran a Buk missile system through our “enhanced border security” that was guarded by both the FSB/GRU and Border Security Services.

If “those independence fighters” are Russians carrying Russian passports---“ain’t our responsibility”, if the international community cannot get to the crash site---it’s the fault of the Ukrainians “ain’t our responsibility”, the fighting is killing civilians then it is the fault of the Ukrainians because we “told” them to negotiate and settle on our terms ie Federated States---ain’t our responsibility” , those T64s/BM21/27/Buks crossing our border--"ain't our responsibility", what somehow we are being blamed for our Army troops shelling Ukrainian positions---"ain't our responsibilty', and the list goes on.

AP recognize by the way the actual events mentioned above?

Now ask yourself the following question and I would like you now to answer it since you wanted a definition of rouge state---does this sound like the actions of a sane, rationally clear thinking participant country in either Europe or Eurasia? Or a sane rational acting country at all?

Thus my statement they are a rogue nation—you can throw in the criminal just based on the Yukos event and the resulting court decision, the killing of the former KGB COL in the UK who was a bitter critic of Putin, and the cyber activities which have never stopped since 1994.

By the way concerning cyber and it is getting worse by the hour and that is why I today have a company combatting it—actually Russian criminals are a great job enhancer these days—check the arrest of a Russian citizen who is now in Guam---and whose mother is the Deputy Duma leader and close supporter of Putin. Then check the Russian citizen recently arrested in Italian---check the amount of personal financial damage done to US citizens/companies.

AP--from Interfax today --another great "it ain't our responsibly" by a Russian sanctioned company. By the way in the current Russia there is some distinct difficulties based on Russian laws and countless shadow/fake companies just who owns these companies or are they in fact just new forms of the old Soviet style state owned companies?

Almaz-Antey chief reacts to company's inclusion on EU sanctions list.

MOSCOW. July 31 (Interfax-AVN) - The European Union's sanctions against the joint-stock company (JSC) Concern Almaz-Antey prove the great importance of the company's products in providing national defense, said Yan Novikov, the General Director at Almaz-Antey.

"The EU decision to impose sanctions against JSC Concern Almaz-Antey causes a dual feeling. First of all, a sense of pride for the company in relation to such a rating of its importance for the country," he said, according to a company's press release obtained by Interfax-AVN on Thursday.

At the same time, "there is a sense of regret for this hypocritical EU decision," he said. "With no evidence of possible involvement of militias, let alone Russia, in the tragedy of the Malaysian Boeing 777 above the Donetsk land, they resort to all sorts of tricks by blaming the designer of the weapon for what happened," Novikov said.

Rouge has been now answered. Debate concluded.

[OUTLAW 09]

Sorry for not replying sooner, but life gets in the way. The situation in East Ukraine has still not resolved to the point that I am able to determine whether the sudden maneuver by the Ukrainian mechanized group that attacked cross-country on July 27 between the key cross-roads town of Debaltseve in the north towards Shakhtarsk in the south has had its intended impact. By the morning hours of July 28th the separatists were able to pry open the east-west roadway in Shakhtarsk and to push back the Ukrainians to both the southern as well as the northern outskirts of the town. Ukrainian losses in armored vehicles due to fighting in urban terrain against short range anti-tank weapons appear to have been fairly heavy. However, Russian claims to have destroyed upwards to 125 vehicles are unconfirmed. Photographic evidence shows a few burnt out BTRs and BMPs. If claims of a modern day Prokhorovka (WWII Battle of Kursk encounter) are to be true, then one would expect video of a field of destroyed tanks by now, but none have appeared in the internet. Even if the Russians have reopened the road towards Luhansk, the road link to the city of Donetsk through Shakhtarsk is tenuous at best; the Ukrainians have the ability to interdict much of the traffic with artillery. Based on accounts by separatist eyewitnesses, a portion of the Ukrainian armored column bisected the east-west road on July 27th and raced southeast to attack Saur-Mohyla mountain from the north; that is from behind of the defenses facing Ukrainian forces to the south (which are currently trapped along the Russian border). However, many armored vehicles were disabled by dense minefields as the Ukrainians attacked up the reverse slope of the mountain. Then the Russians hit them with artillery. Enough infantry dismounted to reach the top in order to seize the mountain, or at least a portion of it. For the last three days, both sides claim to control Saur-Mohyla and concede that the opposite side is fighting very hard to recapture it. According to Ukrainian reports, the separatists are supported by heavy arty and rocket fire from across the border, no more than 8 kilometers to the south. Fresh Ukrainian airborne troops from the 95th brigade and tank support from a company of tanks from the 30th mech brigade are fighting but partially surrounded at Stepanivka, just east of Saur-Mohyla. It seems that any attempt by one side to outflank the other results in a new encirclement. Reportedly, some but not all of the surrounded brigades along the Russian border have been resupplied and a few units have been rotated out and replaced by fresh troops. In an attempt to maintain the initiative, the Ukrainians started a limited offensive to block the same east-west road to Donetsk at Khartsysk, west of their recent breakthrough towards Shakhtarsk and closer to Donetsk. They made some headway (up to Ilyowsk) but are still some 5 kilometers south of the road. Not to be outdone, the separatists have sent long range raiding parties to attack north-east of Debaltseve, to threaten the line of communications of the armored group that attacked recently towards Shakhtarsk. This is a whirlwind campaign where the Ukrainians constantly seek open country for maneuver while the Russians react by forcing the Ukes into positional warfare, preferably in urban terrain. As stated by me previously, all depends on whether the Russians can maintain the rate of reinforcement and resupply over the border near Luhansk (actually towards Krasnodon). One last comment about Outlaw 09's snippet regarding Lt. General Victor Muzhenko, Ukr. Chief of the General Staff, leading the armored maneuver group in a tank. This report is unconfirmed. In the first days of July, when the Ukrainians began this campaign to clear the Donbas, Muzhenko was not Chief of the General Staff. He was merely the commander of the East Ukrainian theater of operations. Reportedly, he led a battalion of the 79th airmobile brigade in an attack up Saur-Mohyla mountain, as a preliminary attack before the Ukrainians sent troops to seal off the border (these three brigades eventually were surrounded and had to dig in). The attack on July 1 to take Saur-Mohyla failed, despite Muzhenko's personal involvement. Perhaps the earlier incident is now mistakenly attributed to the maneuver on Shakhtarsk two days ago. Either way, Muzhenko is quite the "fighting general." The Ukrainians better hope he survives. Muzhenko may be the closest reincarnation of Heinz Guderian, George Patton and/or Ariel Sharon, anywhere today. Where would they be in this war without him?

shchors---this is from Interfax today---now the statement is "many tanks"--that could be defined as say two, three or four as being many.

07/31 12:50 DPR militia claims to have destroyed many Ukrainian tanks, still controlling Shakhtarsk

[OUTLAW 09]

The UK Independent reported this morning of a secret Putin/Merkel peace plan for the Ukraine---"gas for land" ie the Crimea remains Russian with Russia paying billions for lost Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet rents and the Ukraine gets a long term lower gas price for their economy.

Was also released this morning in the German der Spiegel online.

Both the Independent and der Spiegel could get no responses from the Russians, Germans, and the British FMs on the article which is interesting as one would think that denials would be forth coming if not true.

Plan would be hard for the US/UK to accept as they have gone on record as stating that the Crimea will always remain Ukrainian and there has been no response out of Kiev on the article.

http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/zeitung-berichtet-ueber-merkel-putin-plan-sollte-ein-geheimplan-die-ukraine-krise-beenden_id_4028632.html

[OUTLAW 09]

An interesting comment from one of Putin's trusted media commenters. what is really interesting is that over the last few days more and more comments pop up around the net from "Russian commenters" indicating that well maybe it was a mistaken identity of the aircraft by the irregulars that led to the downing thus if a mistake then they are not "terrorists". That messaging was even voice Monday by the Russian UN Ambassador.

An interesting flip of the terms. Terrorists before but if a mistake then not terrorists?


“Putin’s favorite journalist,” Andrey Kolesnikov from Kommersant is broadcasting a very interesting thing. He is broadcasting, and not expressing his own opinion, the text makes it obvious.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/07/31/navalny-what-has-to-be-said-about-the-downed-boeing/


It is not excluded that the Russian president, not trusting anyone fully, does not want to receive another information channel – counting on the “black box” decryption to be controlled by a big number of specialists from various countries, and that in reality this situations is not one in which the Brits may hide something or even intend to do so.

And if in the end at some moment we do find out that the rebels have had something to do with it, it will radically change the attitude towards them. Even if it turns out that it was by pure accident…

Children, adults too, and the elderly who have died for nothing are the red line he cannot cross, nonetheless. Covering for those who did it, knowing that they were the ones responsible… No, he will not burden his soul with such a sin. It is not worth it.

But in order not to cross it, he has to now who did it. It seems he has received all the information he could have from his sources. Now he would like to get information from others. And of course, not SSU workers – everything is already crystal clear about them.

If, I repeat, it turns out, the resistance fighters really did not know that the Boeing was taken down before the plane parts and bodies of the victims started raining down on them – then the policy of the relations with the fighters of the resistance will be reexamined forever.

Yes, Vladimir Putin will refuse to work with them.

[davidbfpo]

Cited in part:
The UK Independent reported this morning of a secret Putin/Merkel peace plan for the Ukraine---"gas for land" ie the Crimea remains Russian with Russia paying billions for lost Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet rents and the Ukraine gets a long term lower gas price for their economy.[/URL]

Link:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/land-for-gas-secret-german-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html (http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/zeitung-berichtet-ueber-merkel-putin-plan-sollte-ein-geheimplan-die-ukraine-krise-beenden_id_4028632.html)

Outlaw09,

I find this story odd, first though this was a deal:
However, these attempts by Ms Merkel to act as a broker between President Putin and the Ukraine’s President, Petro Poroshenko, were put on the back-burner following the shooting down of the MH17 plane in eastern Ukraine.

Does the fact that The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev, a Russian oligarch in exile in London a factor? He also owns the London Evening Standard, which is a free evening paper.

Wiki seems to think it is:
The paper originally described itself as "free from party political bias, free from proprietorial influence"—a banner it carried on the front page of its daily edition. This banner was dropped in September 2011.

Link:[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent#cite_note-6)

[JMA]

Onlookers should see this as a test of ethical journalism for the editorial staff of The Independent and it 31 year old Editor.

Newspaper staff seldom meet the standards they set for others.


Cited in part:

Link:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/land-for-gas-secret-german-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html

Outlaw09,

I find this story odd, first though this was a deal:

Does the fact that The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev, a Russian oligarch in exile in London a factor? He also owns the London Evening Standard, which is a free evening paper.

Wiki seems to think it is:

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent

[OUTLAW 09]

Looks like the FSB/GRU really does have to teach young Russian soldiers to not use social media.

Since it seems the FSB cannot do it---the Duma is now trying to stop social media posting by Russian soldiers.

"A Communist Party deputy is reportedly preparing legislation that would ban soldiers from posting photos and videos on social networks that revealed military equipment or positions."----This alone confirms that all postings are in fact valid postings and geo locations.

This Russian soldier uploaded photos of himself being in both Russia and the Ukraine and basically crossing back and forth----photos were geo tagged and indicated he was inside the Ukraine when he uploaded them.

Claims to be a commo specialist in a APC but mentioned the Buk. So was he the comms dude for the Buk? The SBU did mention they had a voice intercept of a Russian inside the Buk.

Article indicates that he took a beating from Russian commenters for his stupidity of uploading the information.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2711722/The-Russian-soldier-selfie-obsession-prove-Putin-operating-Ukraine-Comms-officer-operates-kit-like-used-MH17-accidentally-reveals-border.html

Second article referencing and expanding the first article.

http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-soldier-ukraine-2014-7

Another either active or former Russian soldier fighting in the Ukraine posts on social media.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/07/31/russian-soldier-posts-gory-photos-of-victims-online/

[OUTLAW 09]

Cited in part:

Link:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/land-for-gas-secret-german-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html

Outlaw09,

I find this story odd, first though this was a deal:

Does the fact that The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev, a Russian oligarch in exile in London a factor? He also owns the London Evening Standard, which is a free evening paper.

Wiki seems to think it is:

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent

David--second thought could be he was testing the waters since he is tied to the oligarchs and they are voicing although unnamed recently their critique of Putin driving Russia into isolation.

Thirdly if that was the case then it was discussed.

Surprisingly there has been virtually no further mention of it in der Spiegel which means the Germans are trying to let it die without comment---the same for die Zeit.

[OUTLAW 09]

Seems like more Russian personnel and armored vehicles arrived into the Ukraine in the past few days---50 vehicle of mixed MRLs, APCs and artillery alone in this convoy.

Video is part of the article.

http://maidantranslations.com/2014/07/31/july-31-2014-50-unit-armored-convoy-entered-ukraine-from-russia/

[AmericanPride]

AP----let's take the Wikipedia definition as a starting point.Rogue state is a controversial term applied by some international theorists to states they consider threatening to the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria, such as being ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction.

Right of the bat you confirm that "rogue state" is a political definition. So - let's look at your definitions of a "rogue state":


1. Ruled by authoritarian regime
2.Sponsor terrorism
3.Proliferation of WMD

The characteristics are problematic. Why? They do not offer any objective value to understanding the behavior of states. Sure - they provide good political commentary, hence the "controversy" of using the term in the first place. If you were to compare the U.S. list of rogue states with all the states in the international community that meet the three characteristics you provide, there is a significant discrepency. The implied definition excavated from your statement is that a rogue state is a state that does not conform to the currently established norms of international conduct in the U.S.-led international system. Now - the real question is this: why is that relevant?


Heck AP we define a home made bomb in Boston as WMD these days so why not a Buk or BM 21/27?

That's a qood question. I'd have to double check, but there's something like over 100 definitions of weapons of mass destructing between local, state, federal, and international law. In some of those definitions, large explosives are classified as WMD. Now - what are the legal implications of classifying conventional military systems as WMD? If the Buk, why not the Patriot missile system? If the BM 21, why not HIMARS?


A common presumption applied to rogue states is that they do not necessarily behave rationally or in their own best interests.

That is a presumption with which I disagree. More often the case, the presumption is the result of a failure of analysis by the one making the presumption.


In political theory it is generally believed that a stable nation, ruled by a leadership that is subject to broad scrutiny (though not necessarily democratic scrutiny), will tend to act in its own best interests and will not take actions that are directly contrary to its own interests, particularly not to its own survival. Rogue states, however, may not be subject to this assumption and, as such, relations with them may be more complicated and unpredictable.

Regime type (authoritarian, democratic, etc) does influence state behavior but authoritarian states are not less 'rational' than democratic states. They are responding to different stimuli in their domestic politics.


Would argue that Russia has not acted rationally since the Georgia events –actually even before that in their direct violation of the INF. Why did they violate the INF—it came out yesterday in a number of press releases after the US charges—the treaty hurts Russia, the treaty is not good for Russia etc. The underlying assumption by the hardliners is ---that was done under weak SU leaders and we are strong thus want to change it now.

You answered your own question. I highlighted it in bold. The nationalists and realists have gathered strength during the second Putin administration, pushing the technocrats and liberals (what's left of them) aside. As I've stated in previous posts, the Russian elite is gaining in confidence and capability, and there's also disenchantment with the dissonance between Russia's ascribed and perceived status. So - if Russia has the means, motive, and opportunity, how are they acting irrational? :confused:


now we have rouge nation who is redefining the concept of ethnicity/culture/language as a smokescreen for imperialistic nationalistic expansion under the guise of “we want to play again with the big boys” BUT we do not want to play “big boy games” meaning accept responsibility for our actions in the international relations game.

The basic tenant of realist IR theory is: "the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must." Why would Russia "acceptable responsibility" for actions for which they do not want to accept responsibility, and why is Russia's decision to not accept responsibility any more objectionable than any other powerful state that refuses to accept responsibility?


Now ask yourself the following question and I would like you now to answer it since you wanted a definition of rouge state---does this sound like the actions of a sane, rationally clear thinking participant country in either Europe or Eurasia? Or a sane rational acting country at all?

Yes - as described in this post and previous posts, Russia has the motive, means, and opportunity to act as a spoiler in the international system. Motive - insecurity caused by the difference between perceived and ascribed status. Means - improving military capabilities relative to other great powers. Opportunity - Georgia, Ukraine, et. al. Again, if all three are present, how is the Russian elite acting irrationally?


Rouge has been now answered. Debate concluded.

And so here we come full cycle. It's clear that Russia has the motive, means, and opportunity to act as a spoiler. But why now? As I've discussed in previous posts, states are concerned with relative power with other states. There's a perception (not completely unfounded, and certainly not helped by U.S. politics) that the U.S. is in retrenchment. That does not necessarily mean U.S. power is diminishing. It just means that U.S. capabilities are diminishing or is perceived to be diminishing relative to other major powers (namely China and Russia, and to a smaller extent, Japan, India, Germany, and perhaps a few others).

But what's the context of this retrenchment? It follows a period of unilateral policies that have aggravated and sowed distrust in the international community through the Bush Doctrine. The retrenchment of military capabilities could not be patched over through diplomatic efforts because the trust and goodwill simply did not exist. So now - after 8 years of the Bush doctrine championing the U.S.' right to unilaterally act as it pleases internationally, we have the Obama doctrine which attempts to preserve the less objectionable aspects of the Bush era while also simultaneously withdrawing from many foolhardy commitments. But that has only opened the opportunity for states like Russia, chomping at the bit to get back in the game as you said, to act. The U.S. escalated conflict through the War on Terrorism and other Bush doctrine policies; now we're trying to de-escalate. However, other states, namely Russia, have taken our cue (Iraq, Syria, Libya, and so on), and have also decided to escalate. That's the problem and why we're caught in this compromising foreign policy position.

Now - you've said that Russia is an irrational state. That's clearly not the case. They have the means, motive, and opportunity. You've also said that Russia is a "rogue state" - well, that's a matter of perspective since "rogue" implies the existence of an overarching international regime of norms and institutions to which one is bound. If the strong do what they can, and Russia has the means to do what it can, how is it a "rogue" state for acting in its own interests?

Lastly - my concern here has never been defining Russia's aggression. Russia is clearly interfering in the affairs of another state. My dispute with you is (1) your claim that this interference is irrational, (2) that this interference is uniquely objectionable compared to the behavior of other states, including the U.S., and (3) that the U.S. priority should be the salvation of Ukraine, regardless of the consequences to the U.S.-Russian dyadic and the overall stability of the international system.

[AmericanPride]

Outlaw,

Also, if Russia is as you claim a rogue state with no concern or understanding of what's in it's own interests, how can you make the claim that punitive sanctions will compel the desired behavior in Russia?

[JMA]

Instead of attempting to pick holes in everything Outlaw states why not offer your opinion on the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea and now the invasion of eastern Ukraine?



Outlaw,

Also, if Russia is as you claim a rogue state with no concern or understanding of what's in it's own interests, how can you make the claim that punitive sanctions will compel the desired behavior in Russia?

[AmericanPride]

Instead of attempting to pick holes in everything Outlaw states why not offer your opinion on the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea and now the invasion of eastern Ukraine?

Sure. I'll repeat my opinion:

Under the Putin administration, Russia has emerged from the shadow of the collapse of the USSR. Since 1991, Russia has participated in ten conflicts with a 70% success rate. Russia still has many challenges but given the reference point of the chaos of the Yeltsin administration, today's Russia is much more capable and confident than it was 20 years ago.

However - that's not the reference point for Russia's elite. The perceived height of Russia's status was in its previous incarnation as the USSR and that's what the current regime (an alliance of nationalists and realists, with some technocrats) is pursuing. Hence the risk-taking behavior (i.e. Georgia and Ukraine conflicts) to restore its former status. Sometime during the first Putin administration, the nationalists and realists finally made a break from the policies inherited from the liberals in the Yeltsin administration. Instead of democratizing Russia and transforming it into a West-phalian nation-state, they've reverted to restoring the imperial system of the USSR (and Empire).

All of this is taking place within two contexts: the escalating confrontational characteristics of the U.S.-Russian dyadic, and the shifting of the balance of international power as U.S. entered its period of retrenchment. The confrontations between U.S. and Russia really started during the Clinton years but really came to the fore under Bush - at a time when Russia was also more confident in its own capabilities. That collapse in relations untethered Russia from the last of its committments to the U.S. and its integration into the Western community (capped by its membership in the WTO). The period of U.S. retrenchment also invited opportunitist states that preceive their relative power increasing relative to the U.S. - namely China and Russia. States are more risk adverse when pursuing gains instead of defending against losses, so more aggressive behavior is an indicator of a reduction of risk (i.e. U.S. deterrence). What signals has the U.S. given to Russia between 2001 and 2014? Color revolutions, invasion of Iraq, financial crisis, response to Georgia, Yanukovych affair, ABM treaty, missile defense, withdrawal of U.S. European forces -- all of these things are signals. What message(s) do they convey about U.S. capabilities and the stability of the international system? Namely that U.S. power is in relative decline and that the norms of the international system championed by the U.S. are optional. Since 2003, U.S. credibility has been significantly damaged as a result.

The same problem exists in the U.S. What are American reference points, perceived and ascribed status? If perception exists of relative U.S. decline and Russian gain, that heightens the feeling of insecurity, even if there are worlds between U.S. and Russian capabilities.

So now we come to Ukraine. Russia perceives itself with increased capabilities and confidence, but not sufficient status. It also perceives U.S. relative decline - hence the constant calls for a multi-centered international system. The U.S., in turn, is insecure given the outcomes of the War on Terrorism and the continued political infighting that has paralyzed effective government. That hasn't changed U.S. policies - the execution of the smart power campaign to topple Yanukoyvch and install pro-Western officials fits in the tradition U.S. playbook. But Russia called our bluff; the U.S. had no back up plan (military or otherwise) hence the desperate campaign to build a coalition around sanctions. The U.S. is still operating with the frame that it is a hegemon, but it is not - Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, et. al proves this. It doesn't mean the U.S. is not the strongest power, it just means U.S. power relative to other states or combination of states is not as strong as originally believed.

Where does that leave us? Sanctions are a political response - (1) they require coordination and commitment from multiple parties, making them difficult to implement (where are China's sanctions on Russia?); (2) they rarely change state behavior, and (3) they are signals to U.S. allies and domestic polities that U.S. is committed to protecting its status (the commitment of which is compelled by framing the U.S. as a guarantor of European security in the first place). A military response is also ineffectual for reasons discussed above - what does a U.S. security commitment to Ukraine look like? That leaves diplomacy.

This is really a question about the balance of power within the U.S.-Russian dyadic - is Russia now a peer competitor to the U.S. or not? And if it is, the secondary question is: what are the implications for the U.S. international security system?

A strategy to address Russia must be constructed within this frame, and it must be honest about U.S. and Russian capabilities and limitations. Russia is acting the role of spoiler because the Russians are honest about their limitations - hence their 70% success rate in conflict. The Russians are confident in their capabilities but know they cannot compete directly with the U.S. - hence the participation in Iran, Syria, Ukaine, etc. Obstructing the U.S. strategy buys them time since the passage of time favors the gaining power and disfavors the declining power. Russia does not benefit for the status quo so it will actively work to change it. Spoiling is a strategy for a state that is strong enough to influence the outcome but not strong enough to dictate it.

Recognizing Russia as a spoiler also implies that there are a range of strategies for dealing with spoilers in the international system. Mainly, that is either building a collective response or of integrating the spoiler into the international system. They are both difficult for their own reasons. Ukraine is a part of this process - it's not a conflict in isolation and its outcome will have consequences for the U.S. Russian dyadic and the international community. We should not rush to failure because our passion about Ukraine's liberty compels us to act immediately.

How do we want to shape the international security environment? What kind of relationship do we want with Russia and why? What can be done to improve U.S. capabilities and credibility?

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---you actually have to finally have your own opinions. You tear things about much like Dayuhan does and yet we seem to never see a total comment by you --so start by answering JMAs comments.

Your comments show you do now understand the use of power soft or hard.

If the rouge state in this case Russia has power pressure addressed towards it ie sanctions then:

1) Russia has two choices either continue down the path of total isolation and economic demise or

2) adjust it's actions and attempt to rejoin the community it claims to want to be accepted by as a superpower or equal to the G7 he tried to join for over seven years

As some say here it is their own choice and it is not being pushed on them the last time I checked---was it not the "little green men" that first Putin denied they existed--- but strangely then did admit they existed that suddenly appeared on a former piece of the Ukraine-- Crimea after annexation,

So did the West- the EU- the NATO, or the US start this game over seven months ago? Remember every thing on NATO did this or that or US did this or that is just another smoke screen he has been running since 2008.

Even his argument of no Russian troops actually inside the Ukraine has fallen completely apart by today with over ten Russian soldiers posting on Russian social media stating they were all inside the Ukraine ---who all forgot that their photos were geo tagged.

Yesterday there were comments coming out of Moscow that Putin had given his military orders to stop weapons from crossing into the Ukraine but somehow they were ignored as the 50 armored vehicles videoed today crossing the border seem to suggest the opposite just as the FSB ignored his orders to secure the border. So it begs the question is he or is he not in charge are is anything he says for real?

Putin is in his own world of perceptions but after yesterday he has now the two choices.

It is now fish or cut bait time and since he is a outdoors type he should know how---and it will be interesting to see the choice he takes.

[AmericanPride]

AP---you actually have to finally have your own opinions. You tear things about much like Dayuhan does and yet we seem to never see a total comment by you --so start by answering JMAs comments.

My opinions are scattered throughout this entire thread - they're probably buried under the mountain of comments that you have provided. Namely, my opinion from the beginning and remains that resolving the political crisis in Ukraine means having free, open, internationally monitored elections inclusive of ethnic Russians. Just because you failed to read it doesn't mean I don't have my own opinion.


Russia has two choices either continue down the path of total isolation and economic demise or

Russia is not on a "path of total isolation". It's on a path of relative isolation from the United States and Europe. Is the 'economic demise' of Russia a realistic or even rational policy? What is gained by destroying Russia?


adjust it's actions and attempt to rejoin the community it claims to want to be accepted by as a superpower

The thing about superpowers - they don't join communities. They build communities around them. That's alliance-making 101. Joining a 'community" (a regime with norms and structures) means ceding some degree of autonomy. Great powers are notoriously jealous of their autonomy so why would Russia be at all interested in joining the U.S.-led system under U.S. conditions with which it clearly disagrees?

Sanctions are going to put the U.S.-Russian relationship in the freezer for a long-time; it will harm Russian economic interests for a short time but states eventually adapt to their conditions, and so sanctions lose their utility over time. Which means we are giving the Russians another pretext to continue pursuing its role as a spoiler rather than building opportunities for engagment to resolve points of conflict.

[OUTLAW 09]

Sure. I'll repeat my opinion:

Under the Putin administration, Russia has emerged from the shadow of the collapse of the USSR. Since 1991, Russia has participated in ten conflicts with a 70% success rate. Russia still has many challenges but given the reference point of the chaos of the Yeltsin administration, today's Russia is much more capable and confident than it was 20 years ago.

However - that's not the reference point for Russia's elite. The perceived height of Russia's status was in its previous incarnation as the USSR and that's what the current regime (an alliance of nationalists and realists, with some technocrats) is pursuing. Hence the risk-taking behavior (i.e. Georgia and Ukraine conflicts) to restore its former status. Sometime during the first Putin administration, the nationalists and realists finally made a break from the policies inherited from the liberals in the Yeltsin administration. Instead of democratizing Russia and transforming it into a West-phalian nation-state, they've reverted to restoring the imperial system of the USSR (and Empire).

All of this is taking place within two contexts: the escalating confrontational characteristics of the U.S.-Russian dyadic, and the shifting of the balance of international power as U.S. entered its period of retrenchment. The confrontations between U.S. and Russia really started during the Clinton years but really came to the fore under Bush - at a time when Russia was also more confident in its own capabilities. That collapse in relations untethered Russia from the last of its committments to the U.S. and its integration into the Western community (capped by its membership in the WTO). The period of U.S. retrenchment also invited opportunitist states that preceive their relative power increasing relative to the U.S. - namely China and Russia. States are more risk adverse when pursuing gains instead of defending against losses, so more aggressive behavior is an indicator of a reduction of risk (i.e. U.S. deterrence). What signals has the U.S. given to Russia between 2001 and 2014? Color revolutions, invasion of Iraq, financial crisis, response to Georgia, Yanukovych affair, ABM treaty, missile defense, withdrawal of U.S. European forces -- all of these things are signals. What message(s) do they convey about U.S. capabilities and the stability of the international system? Namely that U.S. power is in relative decline and that the norms of the international system championed by the U.S. are optional. Since 2003, U.S. credibility has been significantly damaged as a result.

The same problem exists in the U.S. What are American reference points, perceived and ascribed status? If perception exists of relative U.S. decline and Russian gain, that heightens the feeling of insecurity, even if there are worlds between U.S. and Russian capabilities.

So now we come to Ukraine. Russia perceives itself with increased capabilities and confidence, but not sufficient status. It also perceives U.S. relative decline - hence the constant calls for a multi-centered international system. The U.S., in turn, is insecure given the outcomes of the War on Terrorism and the continued political infighting that has paralyzed effective government. That hasn't changed U.S. policies - the execution of the smart power campaign to topple Yanukoyvch and install pro-Western officials fits in the tradition U.S. playbook. But Russia called our bluff; the U.S. had no back up plan (military or otherwise) hence the desperate campaign to build a coalition around sanctions. The U.S. is still operating with the frame that it is a hegemon, but it is not - Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, et. al proves this. It doesn't mean the U.S. is not the strongest power, it just means U.S. power relative to other states or combination of states is not as strong as originally believed.

Where does that leave us? Sanctions are a political response - (1) they require coordination and commitment from multiple parties, making them difficult to implement (where are China's sanctions on Russia?); (2) they rarely change state behavior, and (3) they are signals to U.S. allies and domestic polities that U.S. is committed to protecting its status (the commitment of which is compelled by framing the U.S. as a guarantor of European security in the first place). A military response is also ineffectual for reasons discussed above - what does a U.S. security commitment to Ukraine look like? That leaves diplomacy.

This is really a question about the balance of power within the U.S.-Russian dyadic - is Russia now a peer competitor to the U.S. or not? And if it is, the secondary question is: what are the implications for the U.S. international security system?

A strategy to address Russia must be constructed within this frame, and it must be honest about U.S. and Russian capabilities and limitations. Russia is acting the role of spoiler because the Russians are honest about their limitations - hence their 70% success rate in conflict. The Russians are confident in their capabilities but know they cannot compete directly with the U.S. - hence the participation in Iran, Syria, Ukaine, etc. Obstructing the U.S. strategy buys them time since the passage of time favors the gaining power and disfavors the declining power. Russia does not benefit for the status quo so it will actively work to change it. Spoiling is a strategy for a state that is strong enough to influence the outcome but not strong enough to dictate it.

Recognizing Russia as a spoiler also implies that there are a range of strategies for dealing with spoilers in the international system. Mainly, that is either building a collective response or of integrating the spoiler into the international system. They are both difficult for their own reasons. Ukraine is a part of this process - it's not a conflict in isolation and its outcome will have consequences for the U.S. Russian dyadic and the international community. We should not rush to failure because our passion about Ukraine's liberty compels us to act immediately.

How do we want to shape the international security environment? What kind of relationship do we want with Russia and why? What can be done to improve U.S. capabilities and credibility?

AP---out of all the above and it would take a book to respond---here is your ten word key statement and yet you failed to even answer it yourself.

is Russia now a peer competitor to the U.S. or not?

I will turn the ten words into a question-- is in fact Russia a peer competitor OR really a near peer competitor?

I would argue currently it is a striving near peer as I believe as you do not that while Russia is a military power and a political power---the political power is not from their military strength but rather through their nuclear weapons. Russia has no economic power to enforce/project their military and nuclear political power.

Currently they can only threaten their previous SU empire border countries and that is about it and yet when those countries were offered an alternative their ran in the direction of the EU/NATO not in the direction of Russia--wonder why?

Example--- the threats yesterday about increasing gas prices--all bluff as Russia needs the money that the EU pays--not forcing the EU to shift and become more self sufficient--and that big Chinese deal---the Chinese are using the Russians as a cheap source of oil and gas as they do the African countries for other raw resources.

Some argue that the US is in demise--but can it still project political, military and economic power anywhere in the world---yes it can. I would argue that while chasing UBL and jihadi's around the world they have via their counter threat finance group discovered in fact a fourth power---the power to monitor the flows of USDs and if needed apply legal power against those flows just as they are now applying it against Russian state owned businesses and banks. AP that is the ultimate power and they have learned very well how to use it--ask the Iranians, ask the European banks and the fines they are paying.

So let's see in about 6-8 months if the Russia economy is that of an economic superpower.

Russia is simply a developing country with two raw resources that is being used to finance a corrupt government, a corrupt ruling elite, and the oligarchs that have failed in providing an increased standard of living for the entire Russia population equal to the earnings coming from those resources since 1994.

[AmericanPride]

AP---out of all the above and it would take a book to respond---here is your ten word key statement and yet you failed to even answer it yourself.

Oh - the irony.


I would argue currently it is a striving near peer as I believe as you do not that while Russia is a military power and a political power---the political power is not from their military strength but rather through their nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons are a military asset; ergo, it's a component of military power.


Russia has no economic power to enforce/project their military and nuclear political power.

You need to clarify. Are you saying that Russia does not have economic power to project or that it does not have the economic capacity to support military power projection?


Currently they can only threaten their previous SU empire border countries and that is about it and yet when those countries were offered an alternative their ran in the direction of the EU/NATO not in the direction of Russia--wonder why?

How is the 'why' relevant to Russia's capabilities?


Some argue that the US is in demise--but can it still project political, military and economic power anywhere in the world---yes it can.

Relative decline. That's an important distinction.


I would argue that while chasing UBL and jihadi's around the world they have via their counter threat finance group discovered in fact a fourth power---the power to monitor the flows of USDs and if needed apply legal power against those flows just as they are now applying it against Russian state owned businesses and banks. AP that is the ultimate power and they have learned very well how to use it--ask the Iranians, ask the European banks and the fines they are paying

In other words - sanctions. That's not new. And the historical record of the effectiveness of sanctions is mixed.


Russia is simply a developing country with two raw resources that is being used to finance a corrupt government, a corrupt ruling elite, and the oligarchs that have failed in providing an increased standard of living for the entire Russia population equal to the earnings coming from those resources since 1994.

If that's the case, what's with the hysteria about the threat Russia poses to the United States? Russia cannot simultaneously be a third-rate country and an existential threat to U.S. interests. Either Russia is a threat or it is not - if it is a threat, it's on the basis of its capabilities. If it's not a threat, why not just ignore it?

[Dayuhan]

And so here we come full cycle. It's clear that Russia has the motive, means, and opportunity to act as a spoiler. But why now?

The simple answer to "why now" is that Russia isn't choosing their own time. Certainly Russia is acting as a spoiler in both Syria and the Ukraine, but in both cases the Russian involvement is reactive, not proactive. The Russians didn't initiate the Syrian crisis: the 2011 attempt to expand the Arab Spring into Syria was not their doing. They reacted when one of their very few external allies was threatened. The Russians didn't initiate the Maidan revolt either: they reacted to the perceived threat of having a border state that they've long considered part of their natural sphere of influence move firmly into the Western orbit.

Conspiracy theories aside, these situations grew out of local conditions that were not created (or in many ways fully anticipated) by the US, by "the West" collectively, or by Russia. The external players are in reactive roles, trying to turn events to their advantage. "Why now" was not determined by a decision from any outside player, the outside players simply responded to local events.

It may be true that Russian confidence and relative capacity is growing, but Russian influence is not. If the Ukraine emerges from this with a firmly pro-western regime (with or without Crimea and Donetsk), Putin's only ally on his western border will be the consummate loose cannon that is Lukashenko. Sooner or later he will fall (they all do) and who knows what happens then? Assad may well remain in power, but Syria will be a broken state and as much liability as asset for Putin for years to come. Chinese influence is growing in the 'Stans. Worldwide, nations that find themselves out of favor in the West are increasingly looking to China, rather than Russia, for support and leadership. It's difficult to argue that Russia is in any way ascendant in the global influence derby. Who do they influence?

[OUTLAW 09]

There has been a rather good series of articles on the Ukraine/Russian running from reporters of the csm.com.

This one is a good reflection of those having lived under the Russian mercenaries and now feel that Russia lied to them ie meaning the propaganda was believed but then the reality of the armed separatists was totally different.

This physiological shift is important in actually countering Russia---when the ethnic Russian target population finally realizes that they are part of their own country and that country pays attention finally to them and that they are not some figment of a dream then Russia is no longer a threat to the Baltics and the Ukraine.

This is the true shift that has to happen--in fact the Russian information war has slid into disarray since the crash as the world just as the eastern Ukraine "saw" the truth, woke up, and questioned.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2014/0731/For-eastern-Ukrainians-a-growing-doubt-Is-Russia-manipulating-us

[Firn]

It may be true that Russian confidence and relative capacity is growing, but Russian influence is not. If the Ukraine emerges from this with a firmly pro-western regime (with or without Crimea and Donetsk), Putin's only ally on his western border will be the consummate loose cannon that is Lukashenko. Sooner or later he will fall (they all do) and who knows what happens then? Assad may well remain in power, but Syria will be a broken state and as much liability as asset for Putin for years to come. Chinese influence is growing in the 'Stans. Worldwide, nations that find themselves out of favor in the West are increasingly looking to China, rather than Russia, for support and leadership. It's difficult to argue that Russia is in any way ascendant in the global influence derby. Who do they influence?

I share that way. Overall the discussion seems to drift towards the US-Russian relationship.

@outlaw: A good read. While one should remain sceptical it is difficult to see much military local support in this Russian project. Still there was and is some, even if it is difficult to quantify.


So when the rebellion came to Slaviansk, it was welcomed by much of the Russian-speaking population – as it was across eastern Ukraine. But the rebels, whose numbers in the city were estimated between 5,000 and 7,000, had a distinctly non-local, Russian flavor.

Those numbers are far more then anything I have seen before.

[OUTLAW 09]

Not all Ukrainian oligarchs are just sitting this out or funding their own private fighting groups---this oligarch sold his RR and joined the Ukrainian Army and has been in the forward lines from the beginning.

He says the Russian invasion has changed radically his perspectives.

Wonder if similar Americans of wealth would drop everything and join the US Army?

Amazing what Putin has created inside the Ukraine.

http://www.focus.de/politik/videos/vyacheslav-konstantinovsky-dieser-multimillionaer-verkauft-sein-luxusauto-um-im-ukraine-krieg-zu-kaempfen_id_4033086.html

[OUTLAW 09]

Spin, spinning, spun---wonder if Putin includes the Russian historical drive as he stated for strong cordial relations between countries to include the Crimea and eastern Ukraine?

Has Putin now expanded his views of who makes up Russia by expanding it to cover all Slavic populations as well as Russian populations?

RIA from today:

MOSCOW, August 1 (RIA Novosti) – On the eve of the First World War, Russia did everything possible to persuade Europe to resolve the conflict peacefully and to avoid bloodshed, which reflects the character of the state, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday.

According to Putin, Russia has been advocating strong, cordial relations between countries for ages.

“And this is how it was on the eve of the First World War, when Russia went to great lengths to persuade Europe to settle the conflict between Serbia and Austria-Hungary peacefully. But [Europe] turned a deaf ear to Russian pleas. And it had to confront the challenge and protect the Slavic population, shielding its citizens from external threats,” Putin stressed.

The president added that Russia fulfilled its duty and succeeded in withstanding the onslaught.

[Firn]

German helpers in uniform (http://www1.wdr.de/daserste/monitor/sendungen/ukraine790.html) is a reportage by the German ARD about German citiziens supporting the (Pro)Russian cause. There are supposed to be three Germans fighting on their side of whom the ARD was able to interview one, a certain Nikolaj with a partly Russian background.

More interesting is the way the support campaign is organized and connected to the armed groups. Google translate should help.

[AmericanPride]

From the Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/land-for-gas-secret-german-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html):


The Independent can reveal that the peace plan, being worked on by both Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin, hinges on two main ambitions: stabilising the borders of Ukraine and providing the financially troubled country with a strong economic boost, particularly a new energy agreement ensuring security of gas supplies.

More controversially, if Ms Merkel’s deal were to be acceptable to the Russians, the international community would need to recognise Crimea’s independence and its annexation by Russia, a move that some members of the United Nations might find difficult to stomach.

The incident with the Malaysian flight stalled the negotiations. Also - the Crimean events remind me in some way of the U.S. annexation of Texas. Just a thought.

Anyway, seems like the Germans are the only ones offering a solution that restores functional political relationships and doesn't involve killing more people. Fancy that.

[Firn]

This is what the current military situation looks according to the Ukrainians.

http://gdb.rferl.org/840B77A4-D138-44EB-A9BE-0EC2538A0504_mw1024_s_n.jpg

The design of the Wikipedia map has changed to the better, showing now extent of the urban areas. I tried before to come up with a rough guess of the populations in occupied and liberated areas but this gives a pretty good overview of it at a glance. It may be sometimes a bit misleading, for example Horlivka is of course less densly populated then Donesk, but overall a great way to present the situation.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/East_Ukraine_conflict_%28English_language_version% 29.png/800px-East_Ukraine_conflict_%28English_language_version% 29.png

It also shows that dense urban areas are the cornerstones of the Pro(Russians) defence. The fighting seems to especially fierce in the are of the three cities Shaktarsk, Torez, Shizne along the H21 where Ukrainian forces threaten to cut the (Pro)Russian area in two. Much of the debris of MH17 is found not far north-east of them.

[Firn]

From the Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/land-for-gas-secret-german-deal-could-end-ukraine-crisis-9638764.html):

Anyway, seems like the Germans are the only ones offering a solution that restores functional political relationships and doesn't involve killing more people. Fancy that.

It's owner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Lebedev) has been discussed before. Maybe this means that there is some truth behind it, maybe not. Who knows.

[AmericanPride]

It's owner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Lebedev) has been discussed before. Maybe this means that there is some truth behind it, maybe not. Who knows.

Sure. German government denies it of course - but that's part of secret negotiations. Exposing them before completion tends to sabotage them since they're dealing with sensitive subjects that otherwise could not be resolved in public. So which side is Lebedev on?

EDIT: I'm not familiar with any significant problems in The Independent's past reporting or credibility.

[OUTLAW 09]

An interesting article in light that the large number of videos hitting the web indicating large numbers of Russian tanks, SAM10s, APC, GRADS and artillery have been crossings since 29 Jul coupled with Russian soldiers blogging from inside the Ukraine.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/01/russia-s-military-is-already-in-east-ukraine-will-there-be-a-full-scale-invasion.html

[JMA]

German helpers in uniform (http://www1.wdr.de/daserste/monitor/sendungen/ukraine790.html) is a reportage by the German ARD about German citiziens supporting the (Pro)Russian cause. There are supposed to be three Germans fighting on their side of whom the ARD was able to interview one, a certain Nikolaj with a partly Russian background.

The Russian / German connection is one of the sad and tragic byproducts of the Soviet invasion of Germany in the closing stages of WW2.

One needs to read Antony Beevor's book The Fall of Berlin 1945 (http://www.amazon.com/Fall-Berlin-1945-Antony-Beevor/dp/0142002801/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407003832&sr=1-1&keywords=Berlin+Beevor) to be able to understand the scale of the Russian war crimes committed by the invading Soviet soldiers one of which was mass rape.

This article 'They raped every German female from eight to 80' (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/may/01/news.features11) gives an idea of the scale of these crimes. As a result there were many thousands of Russian fathered offspring.

Many of these children and in turn their own offspring have not had a easy life in Germany as this story attests - The Occupation and its Offspring: Lost Red Army Children Search for Fathers (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-occupation-and-its-offspring-lost-red-army-children-search-for-fathers-a-500251.html).

This legacy - of Russian fathered children - continued - though on much a smaller scale - in the occupied East Germany up to the final withdrawal of Soviet troops after 49 years.

There should be no surprise that there will be a sizeable number of 'Germans' who would feel more at home under their 'fathers' umbrella if welcomed even if they will be cynically used by the Russians as cannon fodder.

If one observes the Afghan men in Kabul it is obvious that there is a Russian legacy in this respect too where an significant minority of men between the ages 25-35 have obvious Russian type features.

[JMA]

It's owner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Lebedev) has been discussed before. Maybe this means that there is some truth behind it, maybe not. Who knows.

What is there to discuss?

Germany made a third major strategic blunder in the the last 100 years - the first two being starting two major wars and then losing them - by placing their national energy reliance on the supply of gas from Russia.

To fix this massive error in judgement the Germans will do anything, sell anyone out, even make a deal with the devil (as it seems they are doing).

It would be dangerous to trust or rely on Germany in relation to Russia right now.

[JMA]

An interesting article in light that the large number of videos hitting the web indicating large numbers of Russian tanks, SAM10s, APC, GRADS and artillery have been crossings since 29 Jul coupled with Russian soldiers blogging from inside the Ukraine.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/01/russia-s-military-is-already-in-east-ukraine-will-there-be-a-full-scale-invasion.html

Outlaw, once again for the US and the EU to accept that what is happening in eastern Ukraine is a Russian invasion would require a response. No balls for that in those places.

[OUTLAW 09]

JMA---fully agree--that is why I have said at the beginning of the Crimea event here in SWJ--the US should have called out the Russian INF violation as well as the failure to disarm under OSCE agreements.

Only now are they calling it out--still though not on the OSCE violations.

A solid read on the Russian INF issue. The article is interesting when one goes back and reads up on the new Russian nuclear doctrine since about 2012.


http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-inf-treaty-russia%E2%80%99s-road-war-11001?page=2

[Firn]

@JMA: I think those in question are mostly those with some German background whose ancestors, called by the Tzars, emigrated a long time ago to settle down in Russia. Germans made arguably the biggest contribuition to the Russian economy, culture and military in the last centuries of all other ethnic groups. The 'right to return' was very attractive to escape the economic ruin and political prosecution in their homelands, 3 millions used that possiblity from 1988 onwards.

Certainly a huge demographic gain for Germany, especially since the intergration was relatively easy. At most three out of so many isn't much.

[AmericanPride]

Unraveling US-Russian relations from New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/world/europe/us-nuclear-deal-with-russia-fails-as-tensions-rise.html?_r=0):


Now, both sides are slipping back toward habits reminiscent of the Cold War. The joint atomic projects have declined substantially. Last week, Washington accused Moscow of violating a major arms treaty on missile technology. After the negotiation of the modest New Start treaty in 2010, progress toward another round of nuclear warhead reductions is dead in the water and unlikely to be revived during President Obama’s term in office.

Even though I've asked JMA and Outlaw repeatedly to what extent does the U.S. pursue the Ukraine issue at the expense of a functional relationship with Russia, I've yet to receive an answer. Ukraine is one part of a larger picture - what do we want that larger picture to look like?

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---here is the hole in your Russia/US thoughts that an aircraft carrier can maneuver through.

Right now Russia operates on a two track process; 1) one track is the maintaining of legally binding business agreements which they hold to even if they go over the cliff and 2) they "use" to hold to signed international treaties/agreements and or memorandums signed since 1994.

I have probably as none on this thread have--- worked closely with the Russian Peacekeeping Brigade Staff/Russia National Military Academy and one of their BNs during to two major command/staff exercises in 2012 and 2013 and wrote together with the Russians a joint Brigade operations concept together with the related joint reporting concepts. Hours and hours of massive negotiations in four days over sometimes the definitions of single words.

By the way I was the first here in SWJ to state cut all joint military planning, exercises and joint education programs---immediately which was done by DoD.

At the end of the planning sessions a joint PowerPoint briefing would be signed and that established for the Russians an "agreement" that they would hold to during any future meetings and if we changed something then they would wave the "signed agreement" and conduct what I would state was subtle pressure on us to come back to the "agreement".

So you see they place "great faith" in agreements so why have they been since 2012 constantly violating them?

Back to their holding to signed agreements since 1994---the current hardliners as well as Putin are adamant in overturning all signed agreements since 94 as they view those agreements to have been pushed on a "weak" Russia and not fitting for a superpower.

If you actually go back and really seriously look at Putin's actions on each and every previously signed agreement he has either violated them , side stepped them, ignored them or demanded they be renegotiated.

Since 2008---the INF, the Memorandum on the Ukraine, the OSCE disarmament agreements, invaded Georgia, and Moldavia taken the Crimea and entered into eastern Ukraine. So AP what your call that track record?---a friendly inclined nice to work with country or simply a rouge country which ignores all agreements and one who does not care what the world thinks?

Now not knowing what world you come from but that defines a rouge country if you finally go back to the Wikipedia definition that I asked you to accept and if not then modify.

So why if a rouge country is not accepting international agreements, annexes territory when the rest of Europe has since 1994 moved on and actually shells and crosses troops into the Ukraine which some would call an invasion in any language.

Now explain to me how you would treat a rouge country as shown above other than through isolation until such time as the current leadership either wakes up and or continues on the path.

What would you have as a functional relationship with a country that is basically a developing second world country which has two raw resources and nuclear weapons -- while claiming they can assist us in the international world problems such as Syria where they even blocked humanitarian assistance, Iran, and North Korea---what as been achieved with Russia assistance---exactly just what agreements have come out of Russian assistance?

Did you read the INF article I posted and have you read the new Russian nuclear doctrine since 2012?---Now explain to me if the Russian leadership "sounds" normal in their view of the world?

[OUTLAW 09]

AP--one of the core Russia/Putin arguments is that Russia has nothing to do with the separatists/irregulars and now called independence fighters AND they adamantly had nothing to do with the shot down.

They have almost an alternative state of reality with this argument and they have not come off of it.

Then this link---which again disproves this argument as have countless other evidence and yet Putin holds to it---so a rouge country or a sane, clear thinking states or a bumbling country?

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?cHash=94777efe016e18741f2d2951183f679d&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=7&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=42703#.U95lQWDlrIX

[AmericanPride]

So you see they place "great faith" in agreements so why have they been since 2012 constantly violating them?

Probably because the favorable conditions under which those agreements were made are no longer present.


Back to their holding to signed agreements since 1994---the current hardliners as well as Putin are adamant in overturning all signed agreements since 94 as they view those agreements to have been pushed on a "weak" Russia and not fitting for a superpower.

And this has already been discussed at length. Again - if Russia has the means (renewed capabilities), motive (desirous of restoring its superpower status), and opportunity (Georgia, Ukraine, et. al), how is Russia's behavior irrational? Even in your own comments you recognize that these conditions for exist yet you insist that somehow Russia's behavior cannot be understood.


a friendly inclined nice to work with country or simply a rouge country which ignores all agreements and one who does not care what the world thinks?

Those are the only two options in diplomacy? Either a country is friendly with us or it is a rogue country? Who again is making the irrational statements? :rolleyes: By the way - if "[ignoring] all agreements" and "not [caring] what the world thinks" constitute a 'rogue country', you should add the U.S. to your list. That's the problem with your descriptions of Russia's behavior; it does not establish how Russia's behavior is uniquely objectionable or irrational, nor puts it in the proper context of the international system.


Now explain to me how you would treat a rouge country as shown above other than through isolation until such time as the current leadership either wakes up and or continues on the path.

Russia is not a "rogue" country. The strong do what they can - and Russia's strength is obviously higher than many people anticipated. I do not think it's wise policy to fixate on one issue at the expense of all others. Is Ukraine's territorial integrity the highest U.S. security interest? If not - then there's a limit to which this should be pursued. I've asked you to identify the extent that the U.S. should chase this issue and you haven't answered. Is that because you don't have a clear end-state in mind?


What would you have as a functional relationship with a country that is basically a developing second world country which has two raw resources and nuclear weapons -- while claiming they can assist us in the international world problems such as Syria where they even blocked humanitarian assistance, Iran, and North Korea---what as been achieved with Russia assistance---exactly just what agreements have come out of Russian assistance?

Here's a few: denuclearization of post-Soviet states; building a functional counter-proliferation regime; mutual reduction of nuclear weapons; supplying NATO forces in Afghanistan; Russian ascension to WTO; and other technical agreements in education, science, and space. So - if as you claim that Russia is "basically a developing second world country", why are you hyping it is a major security threat? There's an underlying contradiction in your argument that you have not resolved.


They have almost an alternative state of reality with this argument and they have not come off of it.

It's generally a good idea to take official pronouncements at face value, Russian or others. It sounds like you believe their propaganda more than they do. It's no more absurd than U.S. State spokesman trying to support/not support the coup/not-a-coup in Egypt. It has to be said because it's political - not because anyone actually believes it.


It may be true that Russian confidence and relative capacity is growing, but Russian influence is not. If the Ukraine emerges from this with a firmly pro-western regime (with or without Crimea and Donetsk), Putin's only ally on his western border will be the consummate loose cannon that is Lukashenko. Sooner or later he will fall (they all do) and who knows what happens then? Assad may well remain in power, but Syria will be a broken state and as much liability as asset for Putin for years to come. Chinese influence is growing in the 'Stans. Worldwide, nations that find themselves out of favor in the West are increasingly looking to China, rather than Russia, for support and leadership. It's difficult to argue that Russia is in any way ascendant in the global influence derby. Who do they influence?

That's part of the problem. There's a disparity between Russia's capabilities and desired status with its ascribed status. That gap creates insecurity and frames policy.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---seeing how you never seem to have your own opinions---here is a puzzle for you to see just how you would suggest a solution.

There is an old Turkish saying---"you do not have to burn the blanket to get rid of a flea".

So AP without burning the blanket just how do you get rid of a single flea?

Answer that and then we can see your thought processes at work because the way you tend to tear apart anyone's comments does not lend itself to a conversation---use to have some old friends of mine for the German 68 generation at the Berlin Free University do that as a "sign of intellectual superiority during 68" in the meantime they are now retiring as bankers, lawyers, doctors and are the farthest from those days--just ask their children who are now in their 30s.

[Dayuhan]

AP---seeing how you never seem to have your own opinions---here is a puzzle for you to see just how you would suggest a solution.

There is an old Turkish saying---"you do not have to burn the blanket to get rid of a flea".

So AP without burning the blanket just how do you get rid of a single flea?

Put the blanket in a dryer and run it at full heat for a little while. No more flea. If you have no dryer, boil a bucket of water and toss the blanket in. Been there, done that, both ways.

A "solution" in the Ukraine is a lot harder, and I'm not at all sure there is one, at least not in any sure or reliable sense. The current program of focusing on economic repercussions, gradually escalating them, and hoping Russia's economic elite can be hurt badly enough to pressure Putin is hardly ideal, but it has the advantage of being reasonably practical.

Despite many hundreds of posts, I'm not sure what solution you'd propose either. Enlighten us, perhaps?

[OUTLAW 09]

Put the blanket in a dryer and run it at full heat for a little while. No more flea. If you have no dryer, boil a bucket of water and toss the blanket in. Been there, done that, both ways.

A "solution" in the Ukraine is a lot harder, and I'm not at all sure there is one, at least not in any sure or reliable sense. The current program of focusing on economic repercussions, gradually escalating them, and hoping Russia's economic elite can be hurt badly enough to pressure Putin is hardly ideal, but it has the advantage of being reasonably practical.

Despite many hundreds of posts, I'm not sure what solution you'd propose either. Enlighten us, perhaps?

Dayuhan---ah someone who understands fleas.

Obama summed it up in the last couple of days outside of oil/gas as a second rate developing country who has nuclear weapons so just really what is the need of Russia for the rest of the global market place and or global political arena? Think about it for a moment if Russia did not have nuclear weapons would we be really all that concerned?

If you really look at it from that perspective then understanding what to do is easy---what is difficult is understanding who to deal with inside the former and still Soviet Union.

http://en.delfi.lt/central-eastern-europe/vladimir-putins-pyramid-of-rule-who-really-governs-russia.d?id=65432116#dreload1407158104477

I have written here often that they are four general legs of power---the following is a far better discussion of the inside groups that control the former Soviet Union ---the West really needs to understand them in light of what is going on in the Crimea and Ukraine.

Both you and AP had not done me the favor of going back and reading thoroughly the new Russian nuclear doctrine since 2012 and then looking intently at their INF violations and tell me Russia has a sane nuclear policy as stated since 2012?

Once in agreement that 1) Russia is a second rate developing country and 2) has developed some rather strange nuclear strike thoughts then we can discuss what should be done.

I am all for far more financial sanctions ie cutting all abilities to get short term credit lines of 90 days are less and cutting the ability to deal in investment quality bonds issued by Russian companies and sovereign fund bonds as a start.

The latest round of sanctions has hurt regardless of what Putin is telling his population and the Russia western sanctions are a farce---especially when they are stopping items like fruit, milk, pork and chicken which is now in short supply across all of Russia driving prices higher for the average Russian, and the bank sanctions have driven private credit interest to now 22%.

[AmericanPride]

AP---seeing how you never seem to have your own opinions

Given your relentless 'coverage' of Putin's information campaign, I would have thought by now that you'd understand that repeating a falsehood incessantly does not make that falsehood true.

For example - here is my opinion on why focusing on the Russian stock market is problematic (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153141&postcount=204). By the way - how has the European market fared with the most recent sanctions?

Here's my opinion on the cause of the crisis (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153141&postcount=204). And my view on a viable political outcome (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153178&postcount=232). And my opinion on Russia's foreign policy drivers (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159384&postcount=1951). And this page contains this post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159313&postcount=1927), another post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159314&postcount=1928), and this third one (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159315&postcount=1929)describing my views on Russia's intentions. And buried somewhere in these 99 pages are several posts in which I describe a possible political outcome to resolve Ukraine's political and economic crisis.


Think about it for a moment if Russia did not have nuclear weapons would we be really all that concerned?


I am all for far more financial sanctions ie cutting all abilities to get short term credit lines of 90 days are less and cutting the ability to deal in investment quality bonds issued by Russian companies and sovereign fund bonds as a start.

So your solutions it to plunge a nuclear power into economic chaos? Do you remember all the security concerns about loose nukes and rogue scientists selling their wares the last time Russia experienced an economic calamity? You know - with senior U.S. officials roaming the former Soviet Union inspecting WMD sites only to find stuff missing. Russia's control over its nuclear arsenal (and other WMD) is far weaker than many people realize and I do not think it's a useful policy to test the limits of that control under the conditions you wish to impose.

I am starting to suspect that your position is less concerned with Ukraine's territorial integrity and more with punishing Russia for diverting from your perception that it ought to stay within the nice political and moral lines you have drawn for it.

[davidbfpo]

At first this headline in 'The Moscow Times' puzzled me,, but they do explain they are a Moscow-based, independent English language newspaper:http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/ukrainian-rebels-aren-t-ukrainian-or-rebels/504197.html

No surprises in the content. more that this is available inside Russia:
Rather than Ukrainian citizens carrying a legitimate grievance against the Kiev government's pro-EU outlook, they are outsiders and usurpers, men with either mercenary or imperial motivations. They are pro-Russian, yes. They are separatists. But these men are invaders — and they are not Ukrainians.

[OUTLAW 09]

At first this headline in 'The Moscow Times' puzzled me,, but they do explain they are a Moscow-based, independent English language newspaper:http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/ukrainian-rebels-aren-t-ukrainian-or-rebels/504197.html

No surprises in the content. more that this is available inside Russia:

David---it is actually balanced based on writers/their locations and on occasions even Russian supportive although not Putin supportive.

[kaur]

AmericanPride, have you studied those numbers?


A survey, which was conducted for my research project by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) in Ukraine, except Crimea, from April 29 to May 11, shows that the representation of separatism in Donbas by the Ukrainian and the Western governments and the media as small groups of Russian military intelligence agents and local “terrorists” or “rebels” who lack popular backing in this region and, therefore, can be easily defeated by force is unfounded. Most residents of Donbas supported different forms of separatism (54 percent).


The survey results also show that views expressed by the Russian government and media concerning widespread popular support for separatism in all of eastern and southern Ukraine are unfounded. Crimea and Donbas do not represent the entire southeast, because they have much larger ethnic Russian populations and a history of separatism. Minorities of residents of three eastern regions neighboring Donbas (15 percent) and in the south (10 percent) support separatism. Ethnic Russians, who are concentrated mostly in the east and the south, are split on the issue of separatism. Some 44 percent of ethnic Russians support different separatist options, including joining Russia (18 percent), while 40 percent favor preservation of the current unitary system, mostly with expanded powers. Among Russian speakers, who include many ethnic Ukrainians, 24 percent favor secession from Ukraine or regional autonomy in federal Ukraine.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/07/20/what-do-citizens-of-ukraine-actually-think-about-secession/

About Crimea.


Forty-one percent of Crimeans in the latest KIIS poll, conducted from Feb. 8-18, said Ukraine and Russia should merge into one state. That percentage has ebbed and flowed in recent years, in part because of the small sample size of any one of Ukraine’s 24 oblasts (provinces) in a national poll. Based on recent years, 41 percent could be an overestimate — just one-third of Crimeans wanted Ukraine to join Russia last year, and fewer than 1 in 4 did in 2012.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-signs-pointed-to-crimea-independence-vote-but-polls-didnt/

First Putin accomplished coup d'etat in Crimea despite KIIS numbers. From Russian side were involved green polite men (Russian army), cossacks, spezturisty from Russia, Presidential administration election specialist, propaganda specialists etc. Then Putin tried to repeat the same in Eastern Ukraine. Look at the Novorossija rhetoric. Then they just run out of steam or decided to use different strategy that balanced resorces and aims. They were stuck in Crimea with resources, EU/NATO started to react etc. Then they switched to propaganda by deed track. This is going on under Russia's leadership. They have hidden in huge cities of Donetsk and Lugansk and due to Ukrainian armed forces training and equipment, their action is producing grievancies among the Donbas people.


This paper models a scenario in which an extremist faction considers attacking
a government in the hopes of provoking a counterterror response that will radicalize
the population, increasing the extremists' support at the expense of a more moderate
faction. In our scenario, such radicalization can result either from the economic damage
caused by counterterror operations or by the way in which such operations change the
population's assessment of the government's motivations.

http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/faculty/dickson/dickson_propaganda.pdf

[davidbfpo]

On reflection I have decided to:


Close this the existing main Ukraine (catch all) thread (1991 replies and 99k views)
Create two threads for current matters
First the fighting and military aspects - this thread
Secondly the wider non-military context (diplomacy, politicis, economics etc)
The Russian Info Ops thread is now in the Europe arena

[AmericanPride]

Kaur,

From your quotes, the majority of ethnic Russians in Ukraine supported some form of separatism. So - the Ukrainians who have a disincentive to legitimize separatist sentiments and the Russians who have an incentive to legitimize those same sentiments attempted to play down/up the support for that cause. No surprise there.

Where I disagree with you is that Moscow attempted the same strategy in eastern Ukraine that it did in Crimea. When the Crimea referendum passed (legitimate or not), in a matter of days Russia formalized it and annexed the region. When the Donetsk referendum passed with the same exact platform as the Crimean one, Moscow deferred and was in fact mostly silent about the results. If Russia is in direct control of the separatists, why would Russia embarress itself by hosting a referendum for annexation only to turn it down publicly and damage its credibility with the insurgents?

I don't think Russia wants to physically govern eastern Ukraine. Instead, I think they want to de-center Kiev's political power and disrupt the new government's ability to actually govern. Destablizing Ukraine weakens its opposition to Russia's aims and makes it more unlikely for NATO members to welcome the country into the alliance.

[kaur]

AmericanPride, Eastern Ukrainians lost their "feet" after Yanukovich Party of regions lost their position. If you follow my text, then they you see that they don't support also joining Russia. Then there must be third solution to their problems.

I didn't say the same strategy like in Crimea. I said that the new ambition was purely too big piece to use exactly the same methods and means. If you follow Russia's problems in Crimea, then you can see that exactly same model is hard to use. There may not be resources.

Donetsk referendum. They didn't back up the referendum by Kremlin statements, but they provided PR specialists, weapons, cossacks, money etc. At that moment for example even EU started to move his feet. Threat of sanctions was connected with for example not spoiling presidential elections in the end of May.

I agree with you last points about Russia's aims. This is minimum program for them.

[Dayuhan]

someone who understands fleas.

Practical lessons of third world living...


Obama summed it up in the last couple of days outside of oil/gas as a second rate developing country who has nuclear weapons so just really what is the need of Russia for the rest of the global market place and or global political arena? Think about it for a moment if Russia did not have nuclear weapons would we be really all that concerned?

From a US perspective, we need the Russians to keep selling oil, because they sell quite a bit of it and if they stop or slow down significantly the world price will escalate tremendously, which would hurt the US.

We could live with a drop in gas sales (gas and oil price patterns are quite different), but we need them to keep selling oil.

We also need them to not start a nuclear war, for obvious reasons.

We want them to stop manipulating and invading their neighbors. We also want them to get their criminal organizations under control, bring trade practices into synch with the developed world, be nicer to homosexuals, etc.

Need and want are of course two very different things. Things you want and things you need are both goals, but they vary in priority and negotiability.

Clarifying goals is a good start, but it also helps to have a realistic and practical plan for achieving the goals.


I have written here often that they are four general legs of power---the following is a far better discussion of the inside groups that control the former Soviet Union ---the West really needs to understand them in light of what is going on in the Crimea and Ukraine.

I think we're all aware that the internal power dynamics of Russia are different from those in the West, and of the four pillars you speak of... but again, what specific policy options do you suggest for responding to or managing that internal situation?


Once in agreement that 1) Russia is a second rate developing country and 2) has developed some rather strange nuclear strike thoughts then we can discuss what should be done.

I agree that Russia is by most metrics a "second rate developing country" and that the Russian government's thoughts on quite a few subjects seem strange to Americans... so what do you, as an expert on the subject, propose that the US do about it?


If you really look at it from that perspective then understanding what to do is easy---what is difficult is understanding who to deal with inside the former and still Soviet Union.

Ok, so tell us what you think we should do. If "understanding what to do is easy" it shouldn't be difficult.


The latest round of sanctions has hurt regardless of what Putin is telling his population and the Russia western sanctions are a farce---especially when they are stopping items like fruit, milk, pork and chicken which is now in short supply across all of Russia driving prices higher for the average Russian, and the bank sanctions have driven private credit interest to now 22%.

Yes, there is evidence that sanctions have hurt. The question is how people will respond. Will they blame Putin and start grumbling that this Ukraine affair is not worth the price, or will they blame the West and rally behind Putin? Probably a bit of both, at least initially, but which will emerge as the primary response? Perhaps more important, how much pressure will (or can) the oligarchs bring to bear to get Putin to back off and place their economic interests above the political goals in the Ukraine?


So your solutions it to plunge a nuclear power into economic chaos?

I don't think "economic chaos" is the goal of sanctions, and it would take much more aggressive sanctions to even come close to that outcome. The goal appears to be more modest: to impose enough economic pain on the oligarchs that they will pressure Putin to revise his policies. Stretching that to "economic chaos" is somewhat over the top.

Economic sanctions may not be an ideal response, but what are the options? No response at all would only encourage and complicate further land grabs and make response to those more difficult, and the non-economic response options are risky, impractical, and generally unappealing, unless you have a proposal I haven't seen.


I am starting to suspect that your position is less concerned with Ukraine's territorial integrity and more with punishing Russia for diverting from your perception that it ought to stay within the nice political and moral lines you have drawn for it.

Are the "political and moral" lines involved specific to Russia in any way?

And, because it's irresistible...

Originally Posted by Outlaw


Right now Russia is in fact a rouge country regardless of how one wants to define rouge.

rouge1
ro͞oZH/
noun

1. a red powder or cream used as a cosmetic for coloring the cheeks or lips.

But on the bright side, if it gets out that Putin is using the stuff, his reputation will be shot forever... ;)

[OUTLAW 09]

Given your relentless 'coverage' of Putin's information campaign, I would have thought by now that you'd understand that repeating a falsehood incessantly does not make that falsehood true.

For example - here is my opinion on why focusing on the Russian stock market is problematic (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153141&postcount=204). By the way - how has the European market fared with the most recent sanctions?

Here's my opinion on the cause of the crisis (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153141&postcount=204). And my view on a viable political outcome (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=153178&postcount=232). And my opinion on Russia's foreign policy drivers (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159384&postcount=1951). And this page contains this post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159313&postcount=1927), another post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159314&postcount=1928), and this third one (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159315&postcount=1929)describing my views on Russia's intentions. And buried somewhere in these 99 pages are several posts in which I describe a possible political outcome to resolve Ukraine's political and economic crisis.





So your solutions it to plunge a nuclear power into economic chaos? Do you remember all the security concerns about loose nukes and rogue scientists selling their wares the last time Russia experienced an economic calamity? You know - with senior U.S. officials roaming the former Soviet Union inspecting WMD sites only to find stuff missing. Russia's control over its nuclear arsenal (and other WMD) is far weaker than many people realize and I do not think it's a useful policy to test the limits of that control under the conditions you wish to impose.

I am starting to suspect that your position is less concerned with Ukraine's territorial integrity and more with punishing Russia for diverting from your perception that it ought to stay within the nice political and moral lines you have drawn for it.

AP---see again you assume you know the former SU---are you actually proposing that Russia has not been actually in economic tumult since 1994---I would argue they never have come out of it especially since their economy has never moved past a state owned/run capitalist/corporate concept which never did die out.

Secondly have you again looked out the window and seen the "peacekeeping troops" parked within three kms from the Ukrainian border which first started out to be 4K and now is over 21K and you then tell me you think you are seeing a "friendly neighbor" who just "wants" to help---come on AP.

You are seeing a rouge state that once it goes down a particular path is incapable of pulling back in the face of reality.

We use to call that nationalism but that ell out of favor in the 70s.

Again AP outside of two raw resources and nuclear weapons what does Russia really offer the West outside of a hard time these days?

This is how crazy Russia is internally--the Office of Transportation threatened to deny western airlines the overflight rights across Russia to Asia WITHOUT understanding that Areoflot gets money for those flights and just the rumor of the cancellation sent Areoflot shares down 8% and then opens the Russian airlines to be denied any overflight rights basically parking all their aircraft on the ground.

Now AP does that sound like a sane government to you or a government out of control internally?

So again the question AP outside of oil and gas and that oil is slowly diminishing by 2020 what does Russia really offer the global market and the rest of the world?

Again AP you make countless comments--what would you personally suggest to Putin is his exit ramp?

Basically it sounds like you would simply give the entire Ukraine to him, and declare his arguments to be correct and heck why not give back the Baltics, the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Poland as well as that is what his view of Russian nationalism is all about.---the recreation of the Soviet Empire as defined by Russian nationalists.

Come on AP post you suggestions to Putin---you know mine let's see yours?

Forgot---here is an article written about what Russia produces---author is heavy on the M17 helicopter thing but he forgot that the Russian M17s and most of their helicopters fly with Ukrainian engines.


We don’t think the president really meant it when he said the Russians don’t make anything. But we still came up with a few items—including those Mi-17 helicopters the Pentagon bought.During an interview this month with The Economist, President Obama made what seemed like an offhanded comment when asked about recent tensions with the Russian government over Ukraine and the failure of his administration’s “reset.”“Russia doesn’t make anything,” the president said. “Immigrants aren’t rushing to Moscow in search of opportunity…And so we have to respond with resolve in what are effectively regional challenges that Russia presents.”That comment is in line with previous Obama statements seeking to diminish the threat that Russia poses to the United States. “Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors—not out of strength but out of weakness,” he said at a March press conference.Of course, the president wasn’t really saying the Russians make and export nothing; that’s obviously not true, though Russia’s manufacturing sector isn’t all that competitive internationally and is generally geared toward domestic consumption.But if only for the sake of adding to our general knowledge, here are a few things Russia does make and export:*Semi-finished iron *Diamonds *Chemical fertilizers *Sawn wood *Copper wire *Radioactive chemicalsHere’s something else Russia makes that Obama should be aware of: the dozens of Russian Mi-17 helicopters that the Pentagon bought for Afghanistan’s security forces, at a price of more than $1 billion. - See more at: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/04/russia-doesn-t-make-anything-except-for-these-weapons-he-buys.html#sthash.86gohELw.dpuf

[AmericanPride]

are you actually proposing that Russia has not been actually in economic tumult since 1994---I would argue they never have come out of it especially since their economy has never moved past a state owned/run capitalist/corporate concept which never did die out.

The conditions of an economy (i.e. "in tumult") and the structure of an economy (i.e. "state owned") are two different things. By nearly all indicators of a healthy economy (e.g. GDP), the Russian economy has significantly improved since 1994, your bias notwithstanding.


Again AP outside of two raw resources and nuclear weapons what does Russia really offer the West outside of a hard time these days?

I've already answered this question.


Now AP does that sound like a sane government to you or a government out of control internally?

It sounds like bureaucracy.


So again the question AP outside of oil and gas and that oil is slowly diminishing by 2020 what does Russia really offer the global market and the rest of the world?

So a country needs to offer something to the "global market" for you to consider it a rational actor with clearly defined interests that should be considered when making policy towards said country?


Again AP you make countless comments--what would you personally suggest to Putin is his exit ramp?

I've already answered that question.


Basically it sounds like you would simply give the entire Ukraine to him, and declare his arguments to be correct and heck why not give back the Baltics, the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Poland as well as that is what his view of Russian nationalism is all about.---the recreation of the Soviet Empire as defined by Russian nationalists.

Are you going to accuse me of being a Russian plant next? :rolleyes: Anyway - you're confusing arguments here. Understanding Russia's arguments is not the same as accepting them. And if "simply [giving] the entire Ukraine to [Putin]" advanced U.S. security, it's not something I would dismiss from consideration (and to be clear in case you misinterpret my comments again, I don't think that 'solution' would advance U.S. or even Russian security).


I don't think "economic chaos" is the goal of sanctions, and it would take much more aggressive sanctions to even come close to that outcome. The goal appears to be more modest: to impose enough economic pain on the oligarchs that they will pressure Putin to revise his policies. Stretching that to "economic chaos" is somewhat over the top.

I agree - my comments were directed at Outlaw, who seems fixated on destroying Russia.

[Dayuhan]

Come on AP post you suggestions to Putin---you know mine let's see yours?

I'd be more curious about your suggestions for Obama. We can all see what the Russians are doing... since you're the expert on the field here, what exactly do you think the US response should be?

Personally, I don't see many options beyond what's already being done: focus on economic pressure, work in concert with Europe as much as possible, and apply gradually escalating sanctions. Not ideal by any means, but who has a better (and realistic) proposal?

[JMA]

I'd be more curious about your suggestions for Obama. We can all see what the Russians are doing... since you're the expert on the field here, what exactly do you think the US response should be?

Personally, I don't see many options beyond what's already being done: focus on economic pressure, work in concert with Europe as much as possible, and apply gradually escalating sanctions. Not ideal by any means, but who has a better (and realistic) proposal?

One understands that US options are limited due to the reticence of EU countries to act - especially Germany - where some economic scrifice is required in so doing. But the US inability to 'influence' EU countries to act more decisively is an indication of the steady implosion of US power and influence... which Putin has realised and is exploiting.

All that said their is serious doubt that the US would have acted decisively anyway. Obama has serious limitations but when one looks at Kerry one can only be horrified how close it was that he became president. Anyone watching China?

[JMA]

... - my comments were directed at Outlaw, who seems fixated on destroying Russia.

And what exactly is the problem with that?

Had the collapse of the Soviet Union been effectively managed this would not have happened. Bush #41 must take responsibility for that.

In the wake of the Crimea / Ukraine invasions certainly the plan must be to emasculate Russia to the extent that it can never again threaten neighbouring states.

How could that ever be achieved with the current Whitehouse and EU governments is the big question.

[AmericanPride]

And what exactly is the problem with that?

Oh let me count the ways... starting with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.


Had the collapse of the Soviet Union been effectively managed this would not have happened. Bush #41 must take responsibility for that.

The Bush administration did not want the collapse of the Soviet Union, recognizing all of the problems that would be unleashed. Events on the ground - the hardliner coup, Yeltsin's nationalism, etc - overtook policy. And how exactly would the U.S. have "effectively managed" the implosion of the USSR anyway? What does "effectively manage" actually mean in practice?


In the wake of the Crimea / Ukraine invasions certainly the plan must be to emasculate Russia to the extent that it can never again threaten neighbouring states.

Because that worked so well with the German Empire? How do you propose to "emasculate" a nuclear-armed country?

You have these broad, sweeping policy ideas but no detail on how it would actually be implemented.


How could that ever be achieved with the current Whitehouse and EU governments is the big question.

Whatever their faults, I trust they're smarter than to become involved in the "emasculation" of Russia (whatever that means).

[Dayuhan]

One understands that US options are limited due to the reticence of EU countries to act - especially Germany - where some economic scrifice is required in so doing. But the US inability to 'influence' EU countries to act more decisively is an indication of the steady implosion of US power and influence... which Putin has realised and is exploiting.

Does that really represent an "implosion of US power and influence"? Has there ever been a time when the US could simply compel Europe to accept US-dictated policies that the Europeans do not believe are in accordance with their interests? What Putin is exploiting is less an implosion of US power than a simple divergence of perceived US and European interests. That's actually not working out very well for Putin, as decision to introduce graduated sanctions in graduated steps does seem to be bringing the Europeans on board to some extent. How far they will be willing to go is of course another question, but reaching for too much too soon would have almost certainly left the US with no support at all.

As Outlaw has pointed out, this is not going Putin's way. His proxies are failing, and he's stuck with a choice between walking away and betraying them or going with a direct intervention with potentially catastrophic consequences for his own economy and for the support he receives from the oligarchs. The oligarchs may be afraid to openly challenge him, but that doesn't mean they can't make their disapproval felt. I don't see how assertive US action is needed at this point.


All that said their is serious doubt that the US would have acted decisively anyway. Obama has serious limitations but when one looks at Kerry one can only be horrified how close it was that he became president. Anyone watching China?

That would depend largely on whether or not there was an opportunity for decisive action that was likely to accomplish anything positive. If decisive action is poorly thought through it can do more harm than good. I watch China all the time, being in the neighborhood, and I don't see much of an opening for decisive US action that would also be productive.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP--I am assuming you read this particular sentence in Putin's recent WW1 speech.

It would be good if we could learn to see at least one step ahead," President Vladimir Putin said recently in a speech on the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I. .

So AP what is Putin's next step he seems to not be able to see nor understand?

Particularly telling for a decision maker who controls nuclear weapons is it not AP?

The sentence tells me he thought he was going to win across the board on both the Crimea and eastern Ukraine and now he has no Plan B.

So AP since you are good at questioning just what should Putin's Plan B be since he is both arming and sending in irregular fighters -- the EU/NATO

nor the US did either the last time I checked. The only thing and JMA will agree one can accuse the EU/NATO/US is they were asleep at the wheel in the Crimea nor do they have a plan now if Russian invades under the guise of "peacekeeping".

Here is Polish views on Plan B---I will offer a third version---invasion under the guise of "peacekeeping" which we all know what happens ie Georgia and Moldavia.

So if that happens will you finally stop and rethink everything you have previously stated and redefine your thinking concerning "rouge" states.

By the way Russia is asking the UNSC today for an emergency meeting---here comes the "peacekeeping" invasion ---if the UN does not act then Russia will state that it will--AP you have got to expand your views.

[Dayuhan]

The sentence tells me he thought he was going to win across the board on both the Crimea and eastern Ukraine and now he has no Plan B.

I don't think anyone here knows with any certainty what Putin thought or thinks, or what his plans are. Speculation on the subject may be entertaining, but it's still speculative.


The only thing and JMA will agree one can accuse the EU/NATO/US is they were asleep at the wheel in the Crimea nor do they have a plan now if Russian invades under the guise of "peacekeeping".

We don't know what plans the EU/NATO/US have. It's reasonable to assume that the fairly obvious possibility of invasion under the guise of peacekeeping has been discussed, but we have no way of knowing what the planned response would be. It's obviously not something that will be advertised.

Invasion under the guise of peacekeeping could of course be preempted if the Ukrainians isolate the remaining separatists, then offer them some sort of deal that will allow the Russians to go home and the bulk of the indigenous soldiery some kind of amnesty. That would not make the Ukrainians happy, but backing the separatists into a corner and trying to exterminate them would provide a strong pretext for intervention. Ultimately that's a decision that has to be made by the Ukrainians, not the US or the EU.


So if that happens will you finally stop and rethink everything you have previously stated and redefine your thinking concerning "rouge" states.

Rogue. Please.


By the way Russia is asking the UNSC today for an emergency meeting---here comes the "peacekeeping" invasion ---if the UN does not act then Russia will state that it will.

We'll see.

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan---rouge yes if the following comment is valid---when Russia annexed the Crimea they used the NATO/US response to both Kosovo and Libya as examples of no UN cover and the West running amok --so they will use the same argument hey the UN did not go along with us and we now will use exactly the same arguments the West used before when they did not use the UNSC--Russia tends to forget that in both countries there had been an ongoing irregular fight that Russia blocked all UN actions on.

They have been false flagging it over the last two weeks and have been called on it---their response---hey ain't us- it is the Ukrainians---they went rouge on the KAL downed flight just as they did on MH17---both times arguing it ain't us.

Russia has a track record of abusing the term 'peacekeeping' as a cover for unlawful military intervention and occupation," the official said. "Given its unlawful attempted annexation of Crimea, which we do not recognize, it is deeply troubling to hear any discussion of Russian 'peacekeepers' in Ukrainian territory. Such statements are destabilizing and unhelpful."

Dayuhan--here is the problem Russia/Putin are having---they want an urgent UNSC meeting on humanitarian reasons in the Ukraine and quote they ar in contact to the ICRC about the problem with the Ukrainians terrorizing proRussians in Donetsk.

THEN along comes their own irregulars and captures three ICRC reps and their drivers and the DNR actual Russian leader Girkin in a voice intercept says thrown them in a hole--check the link for the voice intercept.

Seems like Putin cannot control the ghosts he called up.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/06/terrorists-kidnap-red-cross-representatives/

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---so who is actually smoking dope in Moscow these days--Putin or his Defense Ministry?

And you really want to convince me they are not a rouge state? Well maybe not a rouge state but evidently in an alternated state of reality which is far more dangerous as then they do not fully understand the reality of their problems and that is dangerous especially if they control nuclear weapons.

Again another example of the "ain't me complex".

From Interfax today:

17:19 CLAIMS BY PENTAGON, NATO ABOUT RUSSIA BUILDING UP MILITARY PRESENCE ALONG BORDER WITH UKRAINE ARE BASELESS - RUSSIAN DEFENSE MINISTRY

This was the expanded Interfax press release:

August 06, 2014 17:33


Pentagon, NATO make baseless claims about Russia increasing military presence along border with Ukraine - ministry


MOSCOW. Aug 6 (Interfax-AVN) - Allegations by Pentagon and NATO officials about the continuing build-up of the Russian military presence along the border with Ukraine are misleading the global community, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

"Such claims can only make the Russian Defense Ministry sympathize with Pentagon, State Department and NATO spokespersons. They seem to be serious people who constantly have to improvise in their speeches in order to lend some seriousness to their claims," spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov told journalists on Wednesday.

"Regular escapades about Russia pulling its troops towards the border with Ukraine are reminiscent of a soap-bubble sale auction where the most important thing is to ask the highest price before the bubble bursts," he said.

"Apparently, this is why there are such big discrepancies in figures cited in statements about the alleged 'massing' of Russian troops," the general said.


So AP NATO/US is wrong about the Russian buildup but somehow someone in Moscow forgot to tell the Germans who are picking the buildup with their intelligence services and are highly concerned of a possible "peacekeeping" invasion.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/ukraine-krise-sorge-ueber-russlands-truppen-an-der-grenze-a-984774.html

And somehow someone in Russia ie Putin and the RF MoD does not believe all those NATO/US AWACs flying around using the GMTI sensors are not seeing the buildup as well.

And Russia is not a rouge state come on AP---you never did accept or eject the Wikipedia definition of a rouge state did you as a common ground for this debate.

[AmericanPride]

Dayuhan---rouge yes if the following comment is valid---when Russia annexed the Crimea they used the NATO/US response to both Kosovo and Libya as examples of no UN cover and the West running amok

So, Russia is a rogue country for following the example set forth by other states? Isn't that fundamentally the opposite of going rogue?


Well maybe not a rouge state but evidently in an alternated state of reality which is far more dangerous as then they do not fully understand the reality of their problems and that is dangerous especially if they control nuclear weapons.

That could describe most governments in many fluid, high-stakes environments (i.e. Bush administration during the Iraq War). So even if this point is granted, how does it make Russia uniquely despicable?


So AP NATO/US is wrong about the Russian buildup but somehow someone in Moscow forgot to tell the Germans who are picking the buildup with their intelligence services and are highly concerned of a possible "peacekeeping" invasion.

Again - on the one hand, you are dismissing Russian information operations as delibarate propaganda, and then on the other, you are claiming that the same propaganda is evidence that Russia's leadership is detached from reality. Of course propaganda is detached from reality - that's the point of propaganda!


And Russia is not a rouge state come on AP---you never did accept or eject the Wikipedia definition of a rouge state did you as a common ground for this debate.

See my post (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=159379&postcount=14) dated 31 July.


Invasion under the guise of peacekeeping could of course be preempted if the Ukrainians isolate the remaining separatists, then offer them some sort of deal that will allow the Russians to go home and the bulk of the indigenous soldiery some kind of amnesty. That would not make the Ukrainians happy, but backing the separatists into a corner and trying to exterminate them would provide a strong pretext for intervention. Ultimately that's a decision that has to be made by the Ukrainians, not the US or the EU.

+1

And that's the fundamental problem coursing through this thread; there's a dissonance between the idea that Russia is a third-rate country that can be pushed around and that Russia a major threat to U.S. security. So there's advocacy for aggressive, punitive policies ("emasculation" in the words of JMA) without an honest assessment of how Russia, given its capabilities, will respond.

When faced with unconditional surrender or with ultimatums, how do states respond? The answer to that question depends on that state's perception of its relative strength compared to its adversaries.

[JMA]

And that's the fundamental problem coursing through this thread; there's a dissonance between the idea that Russia is a third-rate country that can be pushed around and that Russia a major threat to U.S. security. So there's advocacy for aggressive, punitive policies ("emasculation" in the words of JMA) without an honest assessment of how Russia, given its capabilities, will respond.

Nah AP, you are way out in left field again.

The problem with this thread is that Outlaw is making the running and offering his take on the situation given the facts (and his career experience) at his disposal... and there are a few Obama apologists chirping from the bleachers.

What is clear is that Russia would not have attempted what they have - in annexing Crimea and invading eastern Ukraine - unless they were sure they would get away with it. Putin correctly assessed the US ability to influence the EU to the extent of presenting a unified front against the aggressor is a thing of the past. He also correctly understands that the greatest fear in the US is of Russian nukes.

While the incremental sanctions may be having some effect as they are increased they are a day late and a dollar short in preventing the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of eastern Ukraine (and the shooting down of a commercial airliner). That I suggest how the reaction to Russian actions should be assessed. Will they lead to the restoration of the pre-invasion status quo with appropriate reparations?

Once this has been achieved steps should be talken to ensure Russia is in no position to repeat this terriorial aggression ever again.


When faced with unconditional surrender or with ultimatums, how do states respond? The answer to that question depends on that state's perception of its relative strength compared to its adversaries.

Who said anything about "unconditional surrender or with ultimatums"? You are making this up as you go along aren't you.

[slapout9]

This thread is Good example of why Mitt Romney is becoming so popular again. He had and has an excellent grasp of economic and worlds affairs. This competent and accurate world view is completely lacking in the current administration, which seems happy with the continued decline of US power and prestige.

[OUTLAW 09]

And that's the fundamental problem coursing through this thread; there's a dissonance between the idea that Russia is a third-rate country that can be pushed around and that Russia a major threat to U.S. security.

See AP you use the term third rate when I use the term second rate "developing" country offering nothing more than two raw resources.

A superpower that can only respond to the EU/US sanctions with what a "blockade of US fruits, grains, vegetables" is what a "superpower"---did you know that after that announcement was made food prices for the "common Russian" jumped 45% in one day---wow what a superpower as Putin stated the day before his "sanctions" were not going to hit the common man in the street---guess what another of his many lies these past five months. Really AP if you believe what is coming out of Moscow and Putin then I can probably sell you prime real estate ie a vineyard in the Crimea.

See AP a rouge country having and threatening the use of nuclear weapons and yes in the early stages of the Crimea nuclear threats were in fact issued by members of the Duma

---I call that rouge my friend regardless of how you define it.

[Dayuhan]

This seems a strange and self-defeating move, if true, simply because it hurts a lot more people in Russia than outside of it. The last thing most governments would want to sanction is their own imports of cheap food. People will overlook many things in the grip of nationalism, but the stomach is pretty close to home.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/russia-bans-u-food-eu-fruit-veg-sanctions-231321612.html


Russia bans all U.S. food, EU fruit and veg in sanctions response; NATO fears invasion

MOSCOW/DONETSK Ukraine (Reuters) - Russia will ban all imports of food from the United States and all fruit and vegetables from Europe, the state news agency reported on Wednesday, a sweeping response to Western sanctions imposed over its support for rebels in Ukraine.

The measures will hit consumers at home who rely on cheap imports, and on farmers in the West for whom Russia is a big market. Moscow is by far the biggest buyer of European fruit and vegetables and the second biggest importer of U.S. poultry....

... U.S. poultry has been ubiquitous in Russia since the early days after the Soviet Union, when cheap American chicken quarters sold at street markets were called "Bush's legs" after the president.

On the invasion side, I'm starting to wonder about the point at which it might be advisable for the Ukraine to call a pause, offer a safe return for Russian fighters and a limited amnesty for local rebels, and even offer a degree of local autonomy... obviously not the kind of autonomy Putin wants, with the east having veto power over foreign policy and other features that would give Russia control, but a substantial carrot. Offering Russian Ukrainians the kind of linguistic and cultural recognition that the French enjoy in eastern Canada might be a start, and could be managed without seriously compromising Ukrainian sovereignty.

The idea is not to give in, of course, but to offer enough of a carrot to undercut any Russian contention that peacekeeping forces are necessary. Obviously this is not a move that the US or the EU can take, the Ukrainians have to be on board and up front.


Dayuhan---rouge yes if the following comment is valid---when Russia annexed the Crimea they used the NATO/US response to both Kosovo and Libya as examples of no UN cover and the West running amok --so they will use the same argument hey the UN did not go along with us and we now will use exactly the same arguments the West used before when they did not use the UNSC--Russia tends to forget that in both countries there had been an ongoing irregular fight that Russia blocked all UN actions on.

If selective interpretation if rules and precedents makes a rogue state, there's a lot of rogue states out there.

I don't see how terms like "rogue" (still less "rouge") are really very useful. Does the term get us any closer to a strategy to get the Russians to stop doing what they're doing?


Dayuhan--here is the problem Russia/Putin are having---they want an urgent UNSC meeting on humanitarian reasons in the Ukraine and quote they ar in contact to the ICRC about the problem with the Ukrainians terrorizing proRussians in Donetsk.

THEN along comes their own irregulars and captures three ICRC reps and their drivers and the DNR actual Russian leader Girkin in a voice intercept says thrown them in a hole--check the link for the voice intercept.

Seems like Putin cannot control the ghosts he called up.

Yes, we see this, we see the contradictions and inconsistencies, and we see that Putin has got himself into a corner. What do you think the US should do about it at this point?


The problem with this thread is that Outlaw is making the running and offering his take on the situation given the facts (and his career experience) at his disposal... and there are a few Obama apologists chirping from the bleachers.

Actually I have yet to see Outlaw make a concrete statement of what he thinks the US did wrong, what he thinks should have been done instead, and what he thinks the US should be doing now. Haven't heard that from you either.

I don't think the US government's course has been ideal, but I don't see what other realistic options they had under the circumstances. I don't think a Republican administration would have played it much differently under the circumstances.


What is clear is that Russia would not have attempted what they have - in annexing Crimea and invading eastern Ukraine - unless they were sure they would get away with it.

Nobody is ever sure. They obviously believed they would get away with it enough to take the risk. In Crimea they were right. In the Eastern Ukraine maybe not so right, remains to be seen.


Putin correctly assessed the US ability to influence the EU to the extent of presenting a unified front against the aggressor is a thing of the past.

A thing of the past? What past is that? When has the US ever had the power to dictate policy to Europe? If a "united front" is dictated by one party, it's not a united front. The united front of the cold war, to the extent that it existed, was not dictated by US influence, it was there because the US and Europe had similar perceptions of the threat and how it could be countered.

Putin correctly believed that if he grabbed Crimea fast enough he could impose a fait accomplii before the US and the EU could work through their disparate agendas and come up with a response. That worked for him. In the Eastern Ukraine he apparently believed that he could get the same result gradually, through proxies. That doesn't seem to be working out so well.


While the incremental sanctions may be having some effect as they are increased they are a day late and a dollar short in preventing the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of eastern Ukraine (and the shooting down of a commercial airliner). That I suggest how the reaction to Russian actions should be assessed. Will they lead to the restoration of the pre-invasion status quo with appropriate reparations?

We have no way of knowing if any alternative policy would have prevented any of these things. Assessing what might have been is at best speculative, especially when nobody seems willing to say what would have been a better (and realistically practical) course of action.

I don't think it's likely that the status quo ante will be restored in any exact way. Whether or not the new status quo favors Russia remains to be seen. If they gain Crimea but see the rest of the Ukraine end up in firmly pro-Western hands that is hardly a win.


Once this has been achieved steps should be talken to ensure Russia is in no position to repeat this terriorial aggression ever again.

What do you think those steps should be?

[OUTLAW 09]

dayuhan/AP---here is where the conversation gets sidetracked deliberately most of the time by AP on the term rouge.

I stated a number of times use the somewhat simiplied term rouge state as defined by Wikipedia as a basis and then expand or reduce in the debate.

There are three core reasons that must be filled in order to be defined a rouge state---and I do not use it in the neo con way.

If you then look at the definition and one notices that word WMD is used as one of the three reasons I would and have argued the shooting down of a civilian airliner and killing 298 with a SAM is in fact the usage of WMD---just as the random shelling of civilian targets by the Russian irregulars via the BM21 and 27s are also in fact the reflect the use of WMD.

This is where JMA is coming from and I have actually shifted to the same view after watching Putin the last six months.

Had the west gone immediately to the sanctions that were just handed out Putin would have side stepped and stopped as it has shown him that yes even the west is willing to be hurt economically in the process.

But by dragging it out and appearing indecisive Putin continued on---and that is where JMA is coming from--there was absolutely no decisive actions taken by the EU nor for that matter Obama and company.

The only one who saw the West's weakness's but was then throttled back by the WH was the NATO Commander Breedlove who called it exactly right straight from the beginning.

See Putin thought the response by the West to the Crimea was weak, he believed there would be far more support from his fellow Ukrainian Russians than actually did occur and he made the fatal mistake of really believing his own propaganda so in the end he has to move on the Ukraine as he literally maneuvered himself into a corner and has been unwilling to accept the exit shown him six different times by both the EU and the US.

The world I am afraid at least in power politics is still defined by perceptions and in the case of Putin's his perceptions are running counter to reality.

So whether you or AP like the word rouge that is exactly what the actions being taken by Putin really reflect.

By the way so me based on the Wikipedia rouge definition just how many more countries could you name using that definition-none--Dayuhan you are wrong on the comment and thus this is why these comments from you and AP go nowhere.

I would argue Putin totally miscalculated and had no Plan B thus invasion is fast becoming his Plan B if he wants to be reelected.

If you had access to Russian media and spoke Russian you would have been amazed at the outpouring of comments yesterday in Russia simply saying we need to protect even with the Army our fellow Russians in the Ukraine---sound vaguely similar to the Crimea?

So much for Putin's view that Russia also protects Slavs.

[Dayuhan]

dayuhan/AP---here is where the conversation gets sidetracked deliberately most of the time by AP on the term rouge.

The term is rogue. R-o-g-u-e rogue. Rouge is a sort of make-up. I know it's petty but seeing the word misspelled 50 times a day is making the copy editor in my brain a little crazy, and if you're going to use it that often you might as well spell it right.


I stated a number of times use the somewhat simiplied term rouge state as defined by Wikipedia as a basis and then expand or reduce in the debate.

There are three core reasons that must be filled in order to be defined a rouge state---and I do not use it in the neo con way.

My question was whether the use of the term actually gets you anywhere in terms of defining responses. Whether rogue or not-rogue, Putin appears to have specific goals and to have calculated that the benefits of pursuing those goals will exceed the cost. He may be rogue. He may be wrong in his calculations. He is not crazy or irrational.

The problem the US and the West face is how to change that calculation without making an even larger mess. If the term "rogue" doesn't help in defining a response, it's not worth arguing over... or misspelling.


Had the west gone immediately to the sanctions that were just handed out Putin would have side stepped and stopped as it has shown him that yes even the west is willing to be hurt economically in the process.

But by dragging it out and appearing indecisive Putin continued on---and that is where JMA is coming from--there was absolutely no decisive actions taken by the EU nor for that matter Obama and company.

Possibly... we have no way of knowing what would have happened in any hypothetical scenario. It doesn't really matter, because the nature of a coalition of peers is that it takes time to negotiate a response that's suitable to all parties. Peer coalitions do have certain advantages, but speed of action and rapid decision making in anything but a major threat situation are not among them. As Putin astutely recognized, there was never going to be a rapid decisive coordinated response. If he assumed that there would never be a coordinated response, he may have been wrong, but he was right in assuming there wouldn't be a rapid one.

It is quite useless to speculate on what might have happened if the US and the EU had produced a rapid, decisive, and fully coordinated response, because it was never going to happen from the start. That's not a consequence of eroding US power, it's just the nature of the US/EU relationship.


By the way so me based on the Wikipedia rouge definition just how many more countries could you name using that definition-none--Dayuhan you are wrong on the comment and thus this is why these comments from you and AP go nowhere.

It was meant as a mildly amusing way of pointing out a persistent spelling error. The definition is of course quite correct, given the spelling.


I would argue Putin totally miscalculated and had no Plan B thus invasion is fast becoming his Plan B if he wants to be reelected.

On this I agree... the question is what can be done to adjust his calculations of cost and benefit I've already pointed out one possibility: for the Ukrainians to offer a cease-fire, amnesty, and a degree of autonomy as a way of pulling the rug out from any claim that peacekeeping forces are necessary. I don't think that's an ideal solution by any means, but if the Ukrainialn forces move into urban areas to root out the separatists it's going to be an engraved invitation to Putin for an invasion under the guise of peacekeeping. Better to not hand them the invitation.

Again, though, the US can only recommend that: I don't think the Ukrainians are taking orders from the US or EU on this.

If you have specific suggestions for what the US, EU, or Ukraine might do at this point to move things toward a better outcome, I'd love to hear them.


If you had access to Russian media and spoke Russian you would have been amazed at the outpouring of comments yesterday in Russia simply saying we need to protect even with the Army our fellow Russians in the Ukraine---sound vaguely similar to the Crimea?

That doesn't surprise me at all. The question is how long those sentiments would remain if things don't go according to plan. The US public was all fired up about the Iraq war early on when things were going their way. Didn't last very long.

[AmericanPride]

If you then look at the definition and one notices that word WMD is used as one of the three reasons I would and have argued the shooting down of a civilian airliner and killing 298 with a SAM is in fact the usage of WMD---just as the random shelling of civilian targets by the Russian irregulars via the BM21 and 27s are also in fact the reflect the use of WMD.

And... I addressed this by raising questions about the implications of classifying conventional weapon systems as "weapons of mass destruction". So - the next time a U.S. drone kills dozens of people in a wedding party, or a U.S. warship downs a civilian airliner, will you argue that the U.S. is a 'rogue' country recklessly using weapons of mass destruction?


On this I agree... the question is what can be done to adjust his calculations of cost and benefit I've already pointed out one possibility: for the Ukrainians to offer a cease-fire, amnesty, and a degree of autonomy as a way of pulling the rug out from any claim that peacekeeping forces are necessary. I don't think that's an ideal solution by any means, but if the Ukrainialn forces move into urban areas to root out the separatists it's going to be an engraved invitation to Putin for an invasion under the guise of peacekeeping. Better to not hand them the invitation.

At this point, this is probably the most realistic outcome with the highest possibility of restoring stability in the region. Kiev needs to find a way to reintegrate the opposition into the political process - that will isolate the radicals and undermine Russian justifications for intervention. What does Ukraine's political landscape look like if it exterminates the armed opposition?


See AP a rouge country having and threatening the use of nuclear weapons and yes in the early stages of the Crimea nuclear threats were in fact issued by members of the Duma

Is that like U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo calling for the nuclear destruction of Mecca and Medina during the GWoT? There are reckless blowhards in every country. So - if we accept your argument that Russia is a rogue, reckless, criminal, irrational country carelessly throwing around threats of nuclear weapons, why is your proposed response to further provoke it? If there's no connection between the country's interests and its behavior, how can you be certain that escalated sanctions or increased U.S. military presence in eastern Europe won't be met with a nuclear first strike? The very ideas of deterrence and sanctions are premised on the assumption that the targeted state is a rational actor and will respond in a way desired by the other state(s).

[AmericanPride]

I don't think it's likely that the status quo ante will be restored in any exact way. Whether or not the new status quo favors Russia remains to be seen. If they gain Crimea but see the rest of the Ukraine end up in firmly pro-Western hands that is hardly a win.

I agree with this assessment. There's a couple of outstanding questions:

o What will Ukraine's post-war political landscape look like? Will it be inclusive of ethnic Russian interests (and what are those interests)?

o What will be Ukraine's relationship with EU and NATO? What kind of security and economic guarantees will be extended to Ukraine from those organizations?

o Assuming a Ukrainian victory over the insurgents, where will the defeated fighters go? This region has a history of roaming armed brigades so if defeat seems imminient, will they withdraw to Russia (or Crimea) and establish a base in exile? Will Russia disarm them or keep them on a low burn for future political leverage?

o What will Russia's political landscape look like? The conflict thus far seems to have strengthened the nationalists and realists in his administration - there seems to be a very distant hope that any liberal (read: Western) influence on policy will ever return. If defeated in Ukraine and sanctions continue, will this trigger a political crisis in Moscow (I doubt it)? Who could come to power afterwards?

o What relationship does the U.S. and Europe want with Russia post-conflict? And how will the outcome affect Russia's perspective on other international security issues (i.e. Syria, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Central Asia, etc)?

I classify the conflict in Crimea and eastern Ukraine as two different conflicts even though the belligerents are the same. The reason is that IMO Russia's intention in Crimea and eastern Ukraine are very different: it just so happens that Russia executed two wars (one direct, one proxy) simultaneously against the same adversary. Crimea is materially important for strategic and political reasons, and Russia's political claims are least nominally valid in comparison to the ones made regarding eastern Ukraine (why didn't Russia annex Donetsk after the region's independence referendum?). The conflict in eastern Ukraine, however, I think is aimed at keeping Russian interests at the bargaining table when Ukraine's political crisis is finally resolved and, failing that, weakening Ukraine to the extent that it cannot seriously impede Russian security interests in Europe.

[Dayuhan]

I agree with this assessment. There's a couple of outstanding questions:

Most of these questions are of course unanswerable. For one thing the government of the Ukraine will play a major role in determining the post-conflict landscape, and their positions are not yet clear. The US and the EU will have very substantial influence over the post-war Ukraine, which will be an economic dependency for years to come, but I personally think it would be a bad idea for the US/EU to degrade Ukrainian sovereignty by dictating policy. It will be a fairly delicate bit of balancing.


o What will Ukraine's post-war political landscape look like? Will it be inclusive of ethnic Russian interests (and what are those interests)?

We don't know. Part of the problem will be differentiating between ethnic Russian interests and Russian national interests... for example, the Russian demand for autonomy with a veto over foreign policy decisions is clearly intended as a Russian level over possible NATO membership and other links tot he West, and is incompatible with Ukrainian sovereignty. At the least the ethnic Russia community could be offered recognition of their language as official, as the Quebecois got in Canada. It would help a great deal if the ethnic Russians can develop a moderate leadership that can articulate expectations and desires of the community without being controlled by Putin. Whether or not that is possible we do not yet know.


o What will be Ukraine's relationship with EU and NATO? What kind of security and economic guarantees will be extended to Ukraine from those organizations?

Ukraine will be effectively dependent in economic terms. The extent of the assistance they receive, and the conditions attached to that assistance, will have to be carefully worked out.


o Assuming a Ukrainian victory over the insurgents, where will the defeated fighters go? This region has a history of roaming armed brigades so if defeat seems imminient, will they withdraw to Russia (or Crimea) and establish a base in exile? Will Russia disarm them or keep them on a low burn for future political leverage?

Ideally you'd send the Russians back to Russia and let Putin deal with them, and allow at least the rank and file of the local insurgents to stay without penalty. Of course that is hypothetical and the governments in question will have a lot to say about it. There may be some agitation among ethnic Russians for full scale relocation to Russia. There is some precedent for this: much of the ethnic Russian population of Kazakhstan has returned to Russia. Whether the Russians would be amenable, or how it could be done in a way that doesn't look like ethnic cleansing, is anyone's guess. My guess is that it will be handled badly and make a mess.


o What will Russia's political landscape look like? The conflict thus far seems to have strengthened the nationalists and realists in his administration - there seems to be a very distant hope that any liberal (read: Western) influence on policy will ever return. If defeated in Ukraine and sanctions continue, will this trigger a political crisis in Moscow (I doubt it)? Who could come to power afterwards?

Not possible to know or control.


o What relationship does the U.S. and Europe want with Russia post-conflict? And how will the outcome affect Russia's perspective on other international security issues (i.e. Syria, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Central Asia, etc)?

I think the risks to "the relationship" are in many ways overrated. The commercial interests on both sides are too strong to repress out of enduring pique, and I'd expect trade relations to be renewed pretty quickly if the conflict is resolved. If the resolution of the conflict is handled in a way intended to inflict outright defeat (or emasculation) of Russia, we can expect them to disrupt our strategic interests to the greatest extent of their ability. Of course that doesn't have to happen.


I classify the conflict in Crimea and eastern Ukraine as two different conflicts even though the belligerents are the same. The reason is that IMO Russia's intention in Crimea and eastern Ukraine are very different: it just so happens that Russia executed two wars (one direct, one proxy) simultaneously against the same adversary. Crimea is materially important for strategic and political reasons, and Russia's political claims are least nominally valid in comparison to the ones made regarding eastern Ukraine (why didn't Russia annex Donetsk after the region's independence referendum?). The conflict in eastern Ukraine, however, I think is aimed at keeping Russian interests at the bargaining table when Ukraine's political crisis is finally resolved and, failing that, weakening Ukraine to the extent that it cannot seriously impede Russian security interests in Europe.

The problem here is that "Russian security interests in Europe" seem to require an allied or at least neutral Ukraine, and short of outright conquest that no longer appears to be achievable. How that sorts out is anybody's guess. The west cannot promise a neutral Ukraine, because that would intrude on the sovereign right of the Ukraine to choose its own alliances. If the Ukraine goes firmly pro-west, even without Crimea, the only ally the Russians have on their western border is Belarus, and that's a shaky ally at best. If Russia can't control the eventual transition out of Lukashenko's rule, they may be left with exactly the situation they want to avoid: the West on their doorstep with no buffer. What Russia will try to do about that is, of course, up to them.

[JMA]

... and allow at least the rank and file of the local insurgents to stay without penalty.

This stuff is straight out of cloud cuckoo land. I give up.

[Dayuhan]

This stuff is straight out of cloud cuckoo land. I give up.

You need to resolve the conflict without giving the Russians a gold-plated pretext to come openly across the border in the guise of a "peacekeeping force". How do you propose to do it?

The point of offering a settlement that appears at least superficially magnanimous is to undercut the Russian narrative and underscore the weakness of Russian claims that intervention is needed to protect ethnic Russians. Of course they will try some counter-propaganda, but the quality of Russian propaganda is very low and effectiveness will be limited.

If they refuse the settlement you express great concern for civilian life, urge all civilians to leave, offer refuge and safe passage, etc. Again, the point is to take away the "crimes against civilians" narrative that the Russians need to support intervention. They will attempt to use that narrative anyway, but the you can deprive it of traction and make it weaker.

If they accept, you send the non-indigenous Russians out, seize the equipment, re-establish the border, arrest the worst leaders... then you can renege on the agreement and do whatever you want, as long as you keep it below the threshold that would trigger intervention.

Insistence on complete military victory followed by rigorous punishment and/or ethnic cleansing for all separatists is just going to provoke direct intervention and a broader conflict. Who gains from that?

How would you propose to resolve the conflict in the eastern Ukraine without provoking direct intervention?

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan---here is where both you and AP get amazingly off track---while you debate what should be done to give Putin an exit off the war road he is on he does not want to come off it--for that matter he cannot come off it if he wants to be reelected.

Here is why:

If in fact what the Ukrainian SBU released yesterday is true and it makes sense ----Russia wanted on 17 July to cross the border and the SBU is indicating they have the voice intercepts to prove Russia movements towards the border at a distance of 500m from the border---the Buk was as the SBU indicates driven and manned by a full Russian crew as they have the voice intercepts---and a Ukraine@war blogger has shown how the Buk was in fact tied into the Russian AD system---the SBU is indicating that the Buk was to have shot down a Russian Aeroflot flight that was on the same exact track but at 11.3kms in height ---it was right above and slightly to the rear of the MH17 which was at 10kms in height and twenty minutes in front of the Aeroflot flight.

The SBU is indicating that the Russian crew got the Ukrainian town names wrong and placed itself in the MH17 flight path not that town which was directly under the Aeroflot flight.

The Aeroflot flight was to have crashed then in Ukrainian controlled areas not as the MH17 did in irregular areas giving the Russia military the opportunity to secure the crash site--- blame the UA---- and conduct "peacekeeping" operations.

They were just as stunned as were the irregulars when it was MH17 that came down.

At the same time both you and AP need to go back and overlay the dates and times of the Russian MRL and artillery fires into the Ukraine---and watch the up tick in firing just before the 17th and through the first two days of the crash---really check the dates and times.

There was an attempted run by the Russian Army with tanks and APC physically into the Ukraine on the night of 12/13 July that was both fired at and blocked by the UA that has largely gone unnoticed.

Secondly, AP keeps talking about and talking about Russia being pushed around and pushed around and threatened---does this sound like the US is the one pushing, nudging, cornering, and agitating Russia?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/7/russian-bombers-penetrated-us-airspace-least-16-ti/

The last time I checked neither NATO or the US has been making airborne border runs and crossing into Russian airspace unless there is something I do not know about.

Take these actions and paste it to the reported very aggressive actions of Russian fighters against the RC135 in neutral waters this week and one has a pattern and it is not that of a "poor" pushed around and beat up on Russia but a very aggressive in your face Russia that is actually crossing boundaries that were never crossed even by the SU in the height of the Cold War days.

AP/Dayuhan---that is the key what is being done now by Putin was a red line never crossed by the SU even in the worst of the CW days. Both sides knew the game---Putin is not playing a game this time.

Again back to both you and AP---why does the world need Russia which only contributed two raw resources to the world economy and one is running out in 2020 and do not give me an answer that well the Russians are contributing their efforts in other hotspots the US needs assistance with---because actually when you look at their assistance it is almost always against anything we do in those hotspots to include now the latest agreements with Iran?

[Dayuhan]

Just to focus on the one clear issue in all that...


Again back to both you and AP---why does the world need Russia which only contributed two raw resources to the world economy and one is running out in 2020

First of all, whether or not anyone "needs" Russia is completely irrelevant. Russia exists, so they have to be dealt with. We cannot make them stop existing. Whether or not anyone needs them, they still have to be managed. I don't see why "need" is in the picture at all. We don't need Iran or North Korea either, but we still have to deal with them.

How exactly do you figure Russia is running out of anything in 2020? What's the source on that?

The US does, in reality, need Russia to keep selling oil, as does everyone else who buys oil. They export 7mbpd +, and if that comes off the market it's hard to imagine where the world oil price will go.

I really don't place much faith in the theory that the MH17 attack was actually a failed false flag attack on a Russian plane. That would need a lot more support to be taken seriously. The question also remains: if Putin wants so badly to intervene in the east, why didn't he do it a long time ago, like after the pseudo-referendum? The troops were in place, the pretext was there, why hold back? Either there's some mysterious force restraining him, or he doesn't want it as badly as you say he does.

Still waiting for your suggestions on what the US, EU and Ukraine should be doing.

[mirhond]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLr77KgJXWA

102 conscripts deserted in Zhitomirskaya oblast' (Central Ukraine)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fX0B-3mGALQ

Over 400 Ukrainian soldiers deserted into Russian territory, 130 have returned to Ukraine, the rest stay, afraid of punishment for desertion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQNaeDsYmjw

Ukrainian officer: Generals betrayed us, left to die, to save my guys I brought them to Russia.

[AmericanPride]

The SBU is indicating that the Russian crew got the Ukrainian town names wrong and placed itself in the MH17 flight path not that town which was directly under the Aeroflot flight.

I'm going to need more than the word of a Ukrainian intelligence officer to believe that Russia intended to shoot down an Aeroflot flight in order to justify direct military intervention. (1) Why wasn't this report disclosed earlier? (2) Why would Moscow contrive this justification so late in the game when the Donetsk referendum provided sufficient political cover for occupation?


because actually when you look at their assistance it is almost always against anything we do in those hotspots to include now the latest agreements with Iran?

As I've stated previously, this is the spoiler strategy that Russia is pursuing in its foreign policy.


The problem here is that "Russian security interests in Europe" seem to require an allied or at least neutral Ukraine, and short of outright conquest that no longer appears to be achievable.

I agree with this. The collapse of the Yanukovych government upset the apple cart and now everyone is scurrying to pick up as much fruit as possible.

[JMA]

This thread is Good example of why Mitt Romney is becoming so popular again. He had and has an excellent grasp of economic and worlds affairs. This competent and accurate world view is completely lacking in the current administration, which seems happy with the continued decline of US power and prestige.

Slap the news is all bad...

Carl says wait for 2017... but if the head is used more than the heart it will be 2024 - after two terms of Hillary.

By then it will be all over for the US as a super power.

[AmericanPride]

Carl says wait for 2017... but if the head is used more than the heart it will be 2024 - after two terms of Hillary.

By then it will be all over for the US as a super power.

The U.S. remains far ahead of any (near) peer competitor in both economic performance and military capabilities. That won't change over the next ten years. America's first rank superpower status is not at risk any time soon - what's changing is that other countries are approaching super-power status and they're not particularly pleased with the structure of the international system. This is made evidently clear by Russia's intervention in Ukraine. Just because the U.S. does not have the hegemonic power to unilaterally dictate terms to all other states does not mean the U.S. is not (or no longer) a super-power.

[OUTLAW 09]

Just to focus on the one clear issue in all that...



First of all, whether or not anyone "needs" Russia is completely irrelevant. Russia exists, so they have to be dealt with. We cannot make them stop existing. Whether or not anyone needs them, they still have to be managed. I don't see why "need" is in the picture at all. We don't need Iran or North Korea either, but we still have to deal with them.

How exactly do you figure Russia is running out of anything in 2020? What's the source on that?

The US does, in reality, need Russia to keep selling oil, as does everyone else who buys oil. They export 7mbpd +, and if that comes off the market it's hard to imagine where the world oil price will go.

I really don't place much faith in the theory that the MH17 attack was actually a failed false flag attack on a Russian plane. That would need a lot more support to be taken seriously. The question also remains: if Putin wants so badly to intervene in the east, why didn't he do it a long time ago, like after the pseudo-referendum? The troops were in place, the pretext was there, why hold back? Either there's some mysterious force restraining him, or he doesn't want it as badly as you say he does.

Still waiting for your suggestions on what the US, EU and Ukraine should be doing.

Dayuhan---Google deeper---you will find the comments concerning the turn down of Russian oil production by 2020 as many of their older fields are dropping faster than anticipated due to overproduction.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine-abroad/deutsche-welle-ukraine-mulls-blocking-russian-oil-and-gas-to-europe-359961.html

Secondly, check the current prices being quoted on sour oil from Dubai and the KSA---remember we pointed you once before to the impact of lower oil prices that caused the pervious Soviet economic collapse.

Read the FP article today by a journalist working for the Interpreter that I linked to here---then come back and tell me Russian troops are not inside the Ukraine already.

By the way Russia has been running false flags ops the last two weeks---the Russian mercenaries fire into Russia and in response Russian artillery and MRLs ACCURATELY hit Ukrainian positions and then the next day Interfax and RIA complain about the Ukrainians shelling Russia---come on Dayuhan.

[OUTLAW 09]

The U.S. remains far ahead of any (near) peer competitor in both economic performance and military capabilities. That won't change over the next ten years. America's first rank superpower status is not at risk any time soon - what's changing is that other countries are approaching super-power status and they're not particularly pleased with the structure of the international system. This is made evidently clear by Russia's intervention in Ukraine. Just because the U.S. does not have the hegemonic power to unilaterally dictate terms to all other states does not mean the U.S. is not (or no longer) a super-power.

AP--you really believe that the US is not a declining power?

[Dayuhan]

Fairly epic shifting of goalposts there. First you write this:


why does the world need Russia which only contributed two raw resources to the world economy and one is running out in 2020

Then you write this:


Dayuhan---Google deeper---you will find the comments concerning the turn down of Russian oil production by 2020 as many of their older fields are dropping faster than anticipated due to overproduction.

Clarity: Russia will not "run out of" oil in 2020. Not even close. Reserves are enormous and there are extensive areas with high potential that have barely been explored. Like many producers (think Mexico and Venezuela) they have relied too heavily on a few developed fields and failed to invest sufficiently in new ones. If they don't draw in new investment and technical support (China is the most probable source, and would not be affected by sanctions) and if they don't address some of their issues with industry structure and inefficiency, they are likely to see a drop in production at some point. A drop in production is not "running out". Two very different things.

You failed to respond to the point that whether or not anyone "needs" Russia is irrelevant: Russia exists and must be dealt with whether anyone "needs" them or not.


Secondly, check the current prices being quoted on sour oil from Dubai and the KSA---remember we pointed you once before to the impact of lower oil prices that caused the pervious Soviet economic collapse.

You actually tried to claim that the oil glut that started in the late 80s was a deliberate strategy employed against the Soviet Union, which is of course quite absurd. I do follow oil prices fairly closely, function of my actual job. They fluctuate for a lot of reasons, analyzed ad nauseam in the trade publications, but it really doesn't look likely that they will stay low enough long enough to do much harm to the Russians... though in current circumstances every little bit counts. They are also not predictable or controllable, so you can't count on them as a factor.


Read the FP article today by a journalist working for the Interpreter that I linked to here---then come back and tell me Russian troops are not inside the Ukraine already.

We all know that Russian troops are inside the Ukraine. We can also see that they aren't winning, and that if Putin wants to tip that balance he will probably have to up the ante dramatically. The question is how we propose to alter the cost/benefit calculation he brings to that plan. What actions do you suggest? Specifically, please.


you really believe that the US is not a declining power?

I think the US is in a period of cyclic reticence, much like the post-Vietnam period. You will recall that there was a great deal of talk about an irrevocable decline in American power at that point as well. The US recently expended massive effort and resources prosecuting pointless and ill-advised wars. Whether or not that marks the start of a long term decline depends more on the success of efforts to rejuvenate the US economy than it does on any foreign policy factor. Power begins at home, and you can't be a superpower without a superpower domestic economy.

The cautious use of power does not mean power is declining, it just means those who hold power are being more careful about how they use it. Managing power carefully is actually a good way to prevent a decline: empires and superpowers are more likely to fall through overextension than through reticence.

It may take a while before America recovers enough hubris to go back to being stupid. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

[OUTLAW 09]

See AP this is where you get off the tracks again---while you want to negotiate over what I am not sure Russia has made two serious attempts to move in their "peacekeeping Brigades" which by the way I helped to train their staffs in 2012/2013 in the concept of how the US carries out peacekeeping ops so I fully understand it when they use the term peacekeeping as I had spent hours driving out of their minds peacekeeping means actually shooting civilians as they knew only one thing in peacekeeping---shooting and asking questions far, far later.

1. they made the UNSC move claiming they were moving together with a IRC humanitarian plan which the IRC promptly stated they had none and the UNSC shot them down

2. yesterday there was a serious move on the Ukrainian border when a large Russian military convoy moved extremely close to the border again claiming "humanitarian peacekeeping together with the IRC"

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/08/russia-moves-column-of-peacekeepers-near-ukraine-as-potential-invasion-escalates/

Even more detail on that Russian "peacekeeping" attempt yesterday---notice AP/Dayuhan when the diplomatic tone gets hard Russia pulls back---not that they will stop and they are still looking for that "humanitarian option to invade with but forceful tones and the word war muttered still does get into Putin's head---and AP all you want is to negotiate?

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russian-humanitarian-convoy-nearly-enters-ukraine-359967.html

Economics is in fact a verifiable weapons system---and the US with their Counter Threat Finance group is getting it right and it is hurting Russia--when the dust settles finally you will notice a shift in the Russian stance.

The Ukraine has bluntly told Russia that any peacekeeping move by their troops is an act of war and will be seen as such and they will call the UNSC, the International Court and effectively stop all gas and oil leaving Russia for the EU effectively cutting their hard cash inflow by over 40% and the more serious threat of a Ukrainian Army guerrilla war voiced yesterday out of Kiev on the Russian Army LOCs is a really effective threat and it is being seen by the Russians as a serious threat.

The Ukraine is not Georgia.

Right now the US is in effect fighting a two front war---the Ukraine and over Iraq--and because we are a declining power we cannot engage both fully thus we have not been focusing verbally and sanction wise on the Russian moves the last three days. One must constantly engage the global public when Russia makes a move--if there is no worldwide comments against them then Russia interprets that as a positive response for what they do---has always been that way even in the CW days.

We claimed for years DoD could fight a 2.5 front war---but the reality is now totally different---when you decline you decline and this is a indicator of that decline.

AP/Dayuhan---reference the two front war problem---this article in German is a good starting point as even the Europeans see it coming.

http://www.focus.de/politik/experten/jaeger/gefaehrliche-zwei-fronten-stellung-neue-gefahr-fuer-die-usa-wenn-russland-und-china-parallel-handeln-usa-einzige-weltmacht-russland-und-china-sind-bereit-zur-abloesung_id_4044042.html

[Shchors]

To delve into Ukraine's current leitmotiv, "the Russians have not invaded yet." Moreover, the Ukrainian army is in the midst of their most ambitious, desperate and risky operation yet in this war. Sloppy and at times uncoordinated, yes! But complex and epic in the face of fierce resistance; one of the most striking military events in the entire history of Ukraine. As of this afternoon Moscow time (15:00) elements of the Ukrainian army have attacked from the northwest and seized western and northeastern neighborhoods of the town of Krasnyi Luch, the last crossroads connecting Donetsk to supply lines leading to the Russian border. The situation reports by the separatist commander, Strelkov, have increasingly become laconic; two hours ago he was blaming the Russian Don Cossacks for running from the field of battle, followed by disparaging stereotypes going back to the Napoleonic wars, to the effect that "when there is serious fighting to be done, the cossacks are never to be found." Things are much more complicated than that, as Russian reinforcements are coming up from the south and the Ukrainians are in for a serious fight if they are to retain control of their new found gains. By having their troops along the border break out from encirclement two days ago, the Ukes have exposed their southern flank to direct reinforcement from Russia. Of note is the performance of a battalion combat group of the 24th "Yavoriwska" mechanized brigade (stationed near my late father's ancestral home in Mostyska), which was surrounded near the Russian border for the last month, where it endured intense rocket and arty fire and lack of food and drinking water. During the successful breakout of the Ukrainian forces from encirclement near the border, instead of destroying its heavy vehicles, like some of the other encircled units, the 24th retreated in full battle order with all operable tanks and armored vehicles in tow and instead of heading west toward safety, actually attacked to the northwest. Two days ago they were the first to break into the town of Miusynsk, just south of the previously mentioned strategic crossroads at Krasnyi Luch. The troopers of the 24th have been locked in heavy street fighting for the last two days and will have contributed immeasurably to the success of the Ukrainian units attacking Krasnyi Luch from the opposite direction. If facts are true, this was quite an impressive performance by a unit that had been shelled from across the Russian border for close to a month and then still had enough combat power to attack in the opposite direction to contribute to an operational success. In fact, the breakout of the Ukrainian "southern group" on 8/7 involved an attacking force heading east towards the encircled forces, who themselves attacked west and met at the town of Dmitrivka along the River Mius (scene of heavy WWII fighting). There, Ukrainian combat engineers bridged the Mius while under fire, enabling much of the encircled force to break out. The Russian separatists resisted fiercely. Photographs on the internet show them next to one of the captured bridges with up to ten destroyed tanks and armored vehicles in the vicinity. If the Ukrainians can consolidate at Krasnyi Luch and be ready to defend against attacks from the south, the separatists in Donetsk and Horlivka will be fully surrounded and cut off from supplies. Absent an invasion by Russian forces, Strelkov's forces in Donetsk are doomed. A climactic moment is near. Either Ukrainian victory or Russian invasion, wherein the war enters a new phase. Thanks for your patience!

[OUTLAW 09]

To delve into Ukraine's current leitmotiv, "the Russians have not invaded yet." Moreover, the Ukrainian army is in the midst of their most ambitious, desperate and risky operation yet in this war. Sloppy and at times uncoordinated, yes! But complex and epic in the face of fierce resistance; one of the most striking military events in the entire history of Ukraine. As of this afternoon Moscow time (15:00) elements of the Ukrainian army have attacked from the northwest and seized western and northeastern neighborhoods of the town of Krasnyi Luch, the last crossroads connecting Donetsk to supply lines leading to the Russian border. The situation reports by the separatist commander, Strelkov, have increasingly become laconic; two hours ago he was blaming the Russian Don Cossacks for running from the field of battle, followed by disparaging stereotypes going back to the Napoleonic wars, to the effect that "when there is serious fighting to be done, the cossacks are never to be found." Things are much more complicated than that, as Russian reinforcements are coming up from the south and the Ukrainians are in for a serious fight if they are to retain control of their new found gains. By having their troops along the border break out from encirclement two days ago, the Ukes have exposed their southern flank to direct reinforcement from Russia. Of note is the performance of a battalion combat group of the 24th "Yavoriwska" mechanized brigade (stationed near my late father's ancestral home in Mostyska), which was surrounded near the Russian border for the last month, where it endured intense rocket and arty fire and lack of food and drinking water. During the successful breakout of the Ukrainian forces from encirclement near the border, instead of destroying its heavy vehicles, like some of the other encircled units, the 24th retreated in full battle order with all operable tanks and armored vehicles in tow and instead of heading west toward safety, actually attacked to the northwest. Two days ago they were the first to break into the town of Miusynsk, just south of the previously mentioned strategic crossroads at Krasnyi Luch. The troopers of the 24th have been locked in heavy street fighting for the last two days and will have contributed immeasurably to the success of the Ukrainian units attacking Krasnyi Luch from the opposite direction. If facts are true, this was quite an impressive performance by a unit that had been shelled from across the Russian border for close to a month and then still had enough combat power to attack in the opposite direction to contribute to an operational success. In fact, the breakout of the Ukrainian "southern group" on 8/7 involved an attacking force heading east towards the encircled forces, who themselves attacked west and met at the town of Dmitrivka along the River Mius (scene of heavy WWII fighting). There, Ukrainian combat engineers bridged the Mius while under fire, enabling much of the encircled force to break out. The Russian separatists resisted fiercely. Photographs on the internet show them next to one of the captured bridges with up to ten destroyed tanks and armored vehicles in the vicinity. If the Ukrainians can consolidate at Krasnyi Luch and be ready to defend against attacks from the south, the separatists in Donetsk and Horlivka will be fully surrounded and cut off from supplies. Absent an invasion by Russian forces, Strelkov's forces in Donetsk are doomed. A climactic moment is near. Either Ukrainian victory or Russian invasion, wherein the war enters a new phase. Thanks for your patience!

Shchors--you make a really interesting point---the US Army had attempted to implement Mission Command into the Force since late 2012 but has largely failed due to internal resistance to changing the command environment.

I caught a comment just yesterday from a former UA COL with Iraq experience who stated that while the Generals have been making all the grand plans it has been the Company through Brigade commanders who while knowing generally what the Generals wanted have via Mission Command many times in the last two weeks made their own decisions on the ground and drove the way they felt was succeeding many times surprising both the separatists and the UA Generals.

Secondly---even the US Army cannot today in 2014 conduct breaching operations across rivers while under fire and build the necessary bridges to take out a 8 mile long armored column of over 200 vehicles all while under fire.

Thirdly, the SBU reported on the night of the 17th of July Russian Airborne and SF units crossed into the Ukraine---evidence to that fact seems to have shown up last week---four captured tanks had the elite Russian Airborne Command insignias on them---hear anything else about those units inside or have they left?

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan--never doubt the Russian ability to use a False Flag operation on their own population if it meets their political needs.

This series of analysis conducted by the Ukraine@war group which were the first OSINT bloggers to truly prove the Buk was irregular controlled and even figured out where the launch site was--took the SBU statements from yesterday concerning the Buk was to have shot down an Aeroflot airliner thus giving Russia the excuse to cross the border and to secure their airliner--but due to the wrong same name they shot down MH17.

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/

Check out thoroughly the OSINT work done by this blogger group and you will notice they come to the decision that yes the SBU might be in fact correct in their alleging the Russians in fact wanted to shot down their own airliner.

Having worked the analysis world their work is actually well done especially coming from open source materials.

What is interesting is that the next day after the shot down the Russian MoD claimed there was an aircraft flying just behind the MH17 but they claimed it was a SU25 which is all but impossible---but in fact the Areoflot airliner was trailing and a tad higher than MH17 and I am betting this is the so called "SU25".

[AmericanPride]

AP--you really believe that the US is not a declining power?

I believe the perception of the decline of U.S. power is less a function of an absolute reduction of U.S. capabilities and more the consequence of the relative increase of power of other states; namely China and Russia. The U.S. does have serious structural problems it needs to fix in the long-term.

First, you say this:


while you want to negotiate over what I am not sure Russia has made two serious attempts to move in their "peacekeeping Brigades" which by the way I helped to train their staffs in 2012/2013 in the concept of how the US carries out peacekeeping ops so I fully understand it when they use the term peacekeeping as I had spent hours driving out of their minds peacekeeping means actually shooting civilians as they knew only one thing in peacekeeping---shooting and asking questions far, far later.

Then you say:


Right now the US is in effect fighting a two front war---the Ukraine and over Iraq--and because we are a declining power we cannot engage both fully thus we have not been focusing verbally and sanction wise on the Russian moves the last three days.

Leading to your conclusion that:


One must constantly engage the global public when Russia makes a move--if there is no worldwide comments against them then Russia interprets that as a positive response for what they do---has always been that way even in the CW days.

It now appears that you are advocating nothing more than expressing diplomatic indignation. I thought Russia was a second-rate power with nothing to offer the world? Now the U.S. is incapable of doing anything about it other than snubbing its nose?

[Shchors]

I too second Outlaw 09's position mentioned above that the Russian Buk shot down the wrong civilian airliner on July 15. There were reports of an averted Russian invasion overnight from July 17-18, that was aborted at the last minute. At the time, it remained a mystery. In light of the Ukrainian SBU's (intelligence service) recent publication of the theory that this incursion was to follow Russian outrage and Western sympathy over a Russian airliner that was to have been shot down over Ukrainian territory by a Russian Buk, but with the Malaysian Air Flight 777 falling instead, the recall of the invasion now makes sense. Regarding Outlaw 09's comment about mission orders, you have to realize that the US Army and Marines occasionally train to fight where they face an equal adversary and their officers try to adjust on the fly on the basis of general mission orders, but in actuality fight scripted wars from above where the adversary has to hide and use guerilla tactics or roadside IED's because of American might, especially in the air and because of integrated digital communications and satellite intelligence. The Ukrainians and Russian separatists, to a large degree, are fighting a WWII era campaign without the sophisticated communications equipment, except at higher staff level. The battalion commanders have mere radio, which as we all know, is not always reliable. My understanding is that the disparate units of the UA, operating apart from each other at a distance of multiple kilometers, have had a problem in maintaining lateral communications, being in touch only vertically with higher headquarters. Nonetheless, when two sides are evenly matched, sophisticated communications often break down as a result of casualties and destroyed equipment, leaving it up to the field commanders to use their intuition to decide what to do next on the basis of limited information. The war in East Ukraine is both fascinating and horrible; a throwback to bold and daring maneuvers between the Wehrmacht and the Red Army.

[OUTLAW 09]

I believe the perception of the decline of U.S. power is less a function of an absolute reduction of U.S. capabilities and more the consequence of the relative increase of power of other states; namely China and Russia. The U.S. does have serious structural problems it needs to fix in the long-term.

First, you say this:

Then you say:
on
Leading to your conclusion that:

It now appears that you are advocating nothing more than expressing diplomatic indignation. I thought Russia was a second-rate power with nothing to offer the world? Now the U.S. is incapable of doing anything about it other than snubbing its nose?

AP---happy to see that you agreed that Russia is a second rate "developing" power and has nothing to offer the world---at least you finally agreed on something.



AP- you definitely got the negotiation thing wrong did you not?

[OUTLAW 09]

I too second Outlaw 09's position mentioned above that the Russian Buk shot down the wrong civilian airliner on July 15. There were reports of an averted Russian invasion overnight from July 17-18, that was aborted at the last minute. At the time, it remained a mystery. In light of the Ukrainian SBU's (intelligence service) recent publication of the theory that this incursion was to follow Russian outrage and Western sympathy over a Russian airliner that was to have been shot down over Ukrainian territory by a Russian Buk, but with the Malaysian Air Flight 777 falling instead, the recall of the invasion now makes sense. Regarding Outlaw 09's comment about mission orders, you have to realize that the US Army and Marines occasionally train to fight where they face an equal adversary and their officers try to adjust on the fly on the basis of general mission orders, but in actuality fight scripted wars from above where the adversary has to hide and use guerilla tactics or roadside IED's because of American might, especially in the air and because of integrated digital communications and satellite intelligence. The Ukrainians and Russian separatists, to a large degree, are fighting a WWII era campaign without the sophisticated communications equipment, except at higher staff level. The battalion commanders have mere radio, which as we all know, is not always reliable. My understanding is that the disparate units of the UA, operating apart from each other at a distance of multiple kilometers, have had a problem in maintaining lateral communications, being in touch only vertically with higher headquarters. Nonetheless, when two sides are evenly matched, sophisticated communications often break down as a result of casualties and destroyed equipment, leaving it up to the field commanders to use their intuition to decide what to do next on the basis of limited information. The war in East Ukraine is both fascinating and horrible; a throwback to bold and daring maneuvers between the Wehrmacht and the Red Army.

It seems that whatever the UA is doing is working as this seems to indicate the newly appointed Donetsk leader has been signaling he wants a ceasefire.

However, hours after Strelkov's statement, rebels said they had reclaimed Krasnyi Luch. "According to preliminary data, Krasnyi Luch is cleared of enemy forces. The battle continues on the outskirts of the city and near Miusynsk from the east," read a tweet from the official account of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic.

With Ukrainian forces pressing down on the rebels, the newly appointed separatist leader in Donetsk Alexander Zakharchenko said he was ready for a ceasefire to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe in the city.

“We hope that the international community will influence the bloodthirsty Kyiv government,” he told RIA Novosti.

The Ukrainian government did not immediately respond to Zakharchenko's statement.

[JMA]

You don't get it do you?

Yes the US has military and economic power and probably will maintain its position in this regard... but what the US have already lost and which will never be regained is the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

It is the likes of your generation AP, who have squandered the legacy and sacrifice of your Greatest Generation and taken the US not to the next level of greatness but rather an unprecedented level of arrogance.


The U.S. remains far ahead of any (near) peer competitor in both economic performance and military capabilities. That won't change over the next ten years. America's first rank superpower status is not at risk any time soon - what's changing is that other countries are approaching super-power status and they're not particularly pleased with the structure of the international system. This is made evidently clear by Russia's intervention in Ukraine. Just because the U.S. does not have the hegemonic power to unilaterally dictate terms to all other states does not mean the U.S. is not (or no longer) a super-power.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---do you really know the multiple reasons that Putin used in his Duma speech on the Crimea that he threw in the face of the West that he used as his justification for moving into the Crimea and wanting eastern Ukraine?

Do you really think he is going to just negotiate those driving ideas of his that he expressed to the Russian people in front of the assembled Duma--away?

He views this current struggle a Russian resistance to the decadent values of the West and his deep fear of the Colored Revolts.

Then you do not understand the current Russian ethnic nationalist imperialism which some call a Russian form of fascism.

When was the last time the US ever got an armed nationalist or a war of liberation movement to "negotiate" heck we cannot even get the Israeli's to halt the bombing of civilians in UN flagged schools.

That is the "moral" power that JMA writes about.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP--with this announcement today from Russian FSB officer Girkin--- Putin has a choice---cross over and provoke a war with the Ukraine and far more serious sanctions or pull back and lose his reelection.

Do you honestly think he will negotiate his way out? He has been offered a number of times from the West an exit ramp--did he take those offers?

DONETSK, Ukraine — The enigmatic commander-in-chief of Russian-backed rebels in this separatist stronghold conceded on Saturday that Ukrainian forces had seized control of a strategically important city in neighboring Luhansk region, and now has his fighters “completely surrounded.”

Igor Girkin, a Russian citizen better known by his nom de guerre Strelkov or “The Shooter,” said Krasnyi Luch, a town located at a junction of important east-west highways and has been a main artery for the rebels to transport reinforcements from Russia into the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, “has been taken by the enemy.”

“The Donetsk-Horlivka group of the fighters of Novorossiya is completely surrounded,” Girkin said, using the term meaning “New Russia.” Horlivka, another rebel stronghold some 20 miles north of Donetsk, has been under siege by Ukrainian forces for weeks. In previous days, they have heavily shelled the city of 250,000, resulting in dozens of civilian deaths and severe damage to infrastructure.

In announcing the loss, which Girkin said was “nothing strange” since he had “repeatedly warned” it would happen, the pencil-mustachioed self-declared defense minister of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic recognized the significant advancements made by government troops in recent days.

[davidbfpo]

JMA posted and cited in part:
Yes the US has military and economic power and probably will maintain its position in this regard... but what the US have already lost and which will never be regained is the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

When was this period of moral 'good'?

[Dayuhan]

AP--with this announcement today from Russian FSB officer Girkin--- Putin has a choice---cross over and provoke a war with the Ukraine and far more serious sanctions or pull back and lose his reelection.

Do you honestly think he will negotiate his way out? He has been offered a number of times from the West an exit ramp--did he take those offers?

I think you're missing the point on the "exit ramp" suggestion. First, you don't offer it to Putin, you offer it direct to the separatists in the field. They've been at it for a while, they're tired, a lot of them are dead, they haven't had the support they expected, they have issues with each other. You're offering them a chance to go home to their families without penalty, and some superficial "autonomy" concessions (official language status, whatever else would not compromise Ukrainian sovereignty).

More important, you know they are not going to accept the offer. Ok, a few individuals or units might, but Putin and his puppets certainly won't. That's not the point. The point is to undercut the narrative of direct threat to ethnic Russians that you say the Russians are trying so hard to build. It's hard to claim that you have to intervene to protect ethnic Russians when the ethnic Russians have a generous offer of re-integration on the table.

It's a propaganda move. Given your focus on propaganda I'd think that would be obvious. Of course the offer won't be accepted; that's not the point. The point is to undercut the narrative and the pretext, and to sow some doubt among the cannon fodder out in the field.


Russia has made two serious attempts to move in their "peacekeeping Brigades" ...

1. they made the UNSC move claiming they were moving together with a IRC humanitarian plan which the IRC promptly stated they had none and the UNSC shot them down

2. yesterday there was a serious move on the Ukrainian border when a large Russian military convoy moved extremely close to the border again claiming "humanitarian peacekeeping together with the IRC"

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/08/russia-moves-column-of-peacekeepers-near-ukraine-as-potential-invasion-escalates/

Even more detail on that Russian "peacekeeping" attempt yesterday---notice AP/Dayuhan when the diplomatic tone gets hard Russia pulls back---not that they will stop and they are still looking for that "humanitarian option to invade with but forceful tones and the word war muttered still does get into Putin's head...

Again, the whole point of the "exit ramp" proposal is to undercut the argument for that "humanitarian option to invade".

You say here that there have been "two serious attempts" to move in, both of which have pulled back. You also say that "when the diplomatic tone gets hard Russia pulls back". If that's true, and that if mere words can get them to pull back, that would suggest a high degree of uncertainty and indecision, even fear. Why else would they pull back from a course already decided on?

If the Russians pull back over nothing more than a change in diplomatic tone, they are running scared and the current approach is working. I'm actually not convinced that this is the case, but you're making some fairly convincing arguments that it is.


Economics is in fact a verifiable weapons system---and the US with their Counter Threat Finance group is getting it right and it is hurting Russia--when the dust settles finally you will notice a shift in the Russian stance.

I agree. I've said from the start that the preferred response would be multilateral, economic, and graduated. Economics is realistically the primary relevant weapons system for the US in this fight, because everyone in the picture knows the US isn't going to war over the Ukraine no matter who sits in the White House.


The Ukraine has bluntly told Russia that any peacekeeping move by their troops is an act of war and will be seen as such and they will call the UNSC, the International Court and effectively stop all gas and oil leaving Russia for the EU effectively cutting their hard cash inflow by over 40% and the more serious threat of a Ukrainian Army guerrilla war voiced yesterday out of Kiev on the Russian Army LOCs is a really effective threat and it is being seen by the Russians as a serious threat.

True, and it's also pretty clear that the West will support the Ukraine with more aggressive sanctions. That leaves Putin with an unpleasant choice to make. The ball's pretty much in Putin's court, and we'll see what he does. The threats are on the table, he has to calculate the costs and benefits either way. I do hope the Ukrainians refrain from direct moves into urban areas where high collateral damage is inevitable. A bunch of dead ethnic Russian civilians will make intervention a lot easier for Putin.


Right now the US is in effect fighting a two front war---the Ukraine and over Iraq--and because we are a declining power we cannot engage both fully thus we have not been focusing verbally and sanction wise on the Russian moves the last three days. One must constantly engage the global public when Russia makes a move--if there is no worldwide comments against them then Russia interprets that as a positive response for what they do---has always been that way even in the CW days.

Can't really buy the two-front war argument. As above, we all know the US isn't going to war with Russia over the Ukraine, and the US is very unlikely to put ground troops back into Iraq. The constraint in Iraq is US public opinion, not declining power, and the reluctance to push another nuclear power to the wall in open conflict in their own front yard goes all the way back to the 50's. MAD still matters.

[flagg]

Russian rebel leader quits:

http://guardianlv.com/2014/08/ukraine-russian-rebel-leader-quits/

[AmericanPride]

Do you honestly think he will negotiate his way out? He has been offered a number of times from the West an exit ramp--did he take those offers?

Yes - putting a gun to Putin's head and demanding a humiliating withdrawal will not compel Russia to change its course. The U.S. does not have that kind of leverage over Moscow short of direct confrontation and serious escalation (and expansion) of the U.S.-Russia conflict. When has this ever worked for the U.S. with Russia?


That is the "moral" power that JMA writes about.


It is the likes of your generation AP, who have squandered the legacy and sacrifice of your Greatest Generation and taken the US not to the next level of greatness but rather an unprecedented level of arrogance.


AP---happy to see that you agreed that Russia is a second rate "developing" power and has nothing to offer the world---at least you finally agreed on something.


but you definitely got the negotiation thing wrong did you not?

Last I checked, the conflict is still on-going, and seeing how negotiations are a component of conflict termination, your rhetorical question makes no sense.

[Firn]

Just an update with the Wikimap. As usual use with care.

It highly likely that the (Pro)Russians now control all the southern and southeastern ares of the Luhansk oblast. The heavy artillery strikes of Russian forces inside Russia against the rather isolated Ukrainian troops certainly facilitated the (Pro)Russian offensive. While a long part of the border was already open, it will be very reassuring for the Russian side to know that the Ukrainian army will have little chance to reduce or even block the stream of men and material from Russia in the near future. They have also been able to avoid an complete encirclement of Luhansk itself, the last large city of the oblast under their control. Most of the Ukrainian forces seem to have escaped the Southern cauldron.

On the other side the very densly populated triangle Donetsk, Horlivka, Makiyivka, if not completely cut-off, can only be supplied by Russia with great difficulties. Of course there seems to be heavy fighting along the string of cities along the souther highway H21 between the two Oblasts, with (Pro)Russian forces trying to relieve the almost completely encircled hub and keep the road open.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/East_Ukraine_conflict.png

[OUTLAW 09]

Seems to be a purge going on in the motherland these days---18 top military officers and government officials have been "let go".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/putin-sacks-18-topranking-russian-officials-9659120.html


So AP ----a result of 1) the failure of the irregulars in eastern Ukraine, 2) a result of under estimating western sanctions or 3) hardliners not being hard enough---pick one---will bet none of them would have ever negotiated.

Or none of the above and Putin desperately trying to signal the west he wants an off ramp? Since out of the 4.5 million Russians in the "New Russia" only 1.5K joined the irregulars well so much for the vaulted ethnic Russian minority in the Ukraine fighting for their not Russian "independence".

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---you need to finally bury your negotiations concept---this is a perfect example of what is being fed to the Russian population 24X7 since actually before the Crimea.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/10/watch-this-performance-broadcast-nationally-in-russia-invokes-nazism-support-for-terrorism-and-the-restoration-of-the-soviet-union/

And you really think Putin is going to negotiate when his own population blames the west and the Ukraine and give him this week even higher poll numbers.

A snow balls chance in the after life of him negotiating over the "New Russia" that he himself called into existence in several of his key speeches if it means him losing face and his mercenaries laying down their arms as that signals a military defeat and Russia cannot under Putin suffer a military defeat.

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan--you asked for what red lines have been crossed---Google the Helsinki Accords and reread them in detail and then state whether you think the former Soviet Union now Russia is in violation of the Helsinki Accords which laid down even for the SU Communist Party certain standards for both the East and West.

You will notice that Putin and company have attempted for the last decade to undermine the Helsinki Accords.

Then ask yourself why he is undermining them just at this time ie the Crimea and eastern Ukraine and then ask yourself does the current Putin Doctrine of "World Russia" meaning Russia can effectively enter any country they feel is mistreating Russians ---is it in fact a direct challenge to the Accords.

Once you work your way through the Accords---really read them then I will show you the next line that was crossed.

We will go baby step through baby step so the line crossings become extremely clear as many commenting here seem to have not noticed them for some strange reason.

[OUTLAW 09]

Dayuhan--you made a recent remark that you doubted the SBU suggestion that the MH17 was a Russian False Flag operation that went sideways as doubtful.

I linked you to a blogger who was the lead blogger using OSINT to prove the use of the Buk by the mercenaries as well as the potential launch site which was then used by US intelligence for a global briefing.

That same blogger has now attempted to prove and or disprove the new SBU accusations that Russia wanted to shot down an areoflot airliner and simply missed and he tended to come to the result that it was in fact highly possible and needed more info from the SBU to be provided ie voice intercepts and or photos for geo tagging.

He then placed the direct challenge to who he calls "the Trolls" (Russian bloggers supporting Putin) and who we might suggest mirhond as an example from our own experience to disprove his analysis.

And presto several bit hard and now he is taking their arguments apart again using only OSINT.

Well worth watching the ongoing exchange as an example of Russian blogger "trolls" at work to disprove Russian involvement in MH17.

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/

Dayuhan--when we talk about Russian false flag operations do not forget for a moment what the FSB did in order to give Russia an reason to invade Chechnya---check Google on the four apartment buildings that were blow up killing over 300--history is now saying Russia blew up the buildings---so shooting down an airliner and using it to give one an excuse--- remember I pointed you towards the Russian emphasis on "legality"---to "legally" cross into the Ukraine.

Again remember just how many civilian Chechens were killed in the two invasions over 10K and now Russia argues to the entire world hey 1.7K have been killed in eastern Ukraine (notice they never talk about Russian mercenaries fighting there to the tune of over 10K using heavy weapons driven across that supposedly "secured border" that Putin held a press conference on it?)--that is a humanitarian disaster so hey we had "legal" rights to bring in humanitarian supplies since they are our fellow Russians that we must take care of---remember they have in the past brought in such aid to Donetsk making a big video announcement about it---what they did not show where three trucks carrying weapons, and munitions as well as SAMs that were part of that convoy.

False flag operations are a key corner stone of Russian politics since the 30s.

[OUTLAW 09]

Russia is still trying to do the "humanitarian" invasion thing regardless of western warnings that such movements are in fact illegal because all necessary NGOs and the IRC are already inside the Ukraine.


http://theweek.com/article/index/266134/speedreads-russia-offers-donetsk-rebels-troop-support-to-avert-an-impending-humanitarian-crisis

Here is the Russian FM's comments concerning the "humanitarian assistance"----notice they mentioned that they "received the US comments"--that is an interesting comment from the FM so they were in fact going to move an "humanitarian invasion" the across the border into the Ukraine and the US call "seemed" to bring the convoy to a halt.

http://en.ria.ru/politics/20140810/191889187/Russias-Lavrov-Urges-Humanitarian-Aid-Ceasefire-in-Eastern.html

Seems like the US has moved to a more forceful spoken English language set of words--whatever was said did make it into Putin's head.

What is interesting is that the current leader of the DNR at first was voicing the claim of major humanitarian problems and "wanted a ceasefire" and when he heard the Ukrainian militay response was "white flag and lay down your weapons" he no longer called for "humanitarian assistance".

While Russia in this link slams the Ukraine for not holding to the Geneva Agreements Russia "seemed" to forget that part of that agreement was the mercenaries laying down their arms and leaving all occupied buildings--and that is also what they signed as well.

Russia has a short memory on what it signs these days but that is part of their cognitive dissonance.

What is more interesting is the press release that Interfax placed on the same topic---notice the difference in press releases.

http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=527435

[JMA]

JMA posted and cited in part:

When was this period of moral 'good'?

So you too misquote me.

I said:


... the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

There is no doubt the US can take credit and the kudos for bringing Soviet Russia to its knees. That was good for the world as a whole. that good work done the yanks then went soft on Russia and failed to take the necessary action to make sure that Russia would never again be able to threaten neighbouring states and nations. This represents yet another US foreign policy failure.

[OUTLAW 09]

So you too misquote me.

I said:



There is no doubt the US can take credit and the kudos for bringing Soviet Russia to its knees. That was good for the world as a whole. that good work done the yanks then went soft on Russia and failed to take the necessary action to make sure that Russia would never again be able to threaten neighbouring states and nations. This represents yet another US foreign policy failure.

JMA---notice the Russian FM comments on "receiving the US call" concerning the "humanitarian convoy" that was not an "invasion force" from my previous link.

Cryptic was all one can say about his comment--would have been interesting to have learned what the US told Russia on that call? Word has it that just minutes after the US called the Russians informed the US that the convoy had indeed stopped.

Secondly, I for one believe the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union was the price of Russian sour crude collapsing under pressure of the KSA that opened the flow of sour crude and drove the price down for a long period thus denying Russian an extremely large amount of cash flow that they had planned for their internal budget.

Thus the SU collapse---now what is interesting is who together with the KSA thought up that pricing maneuver?

[OUTLAW 09]

For those that speak German---this link confirms the hardness of the US call placed to Putin indicating that the "humanitarian invasion" bluff was off the table.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/kaempfe-in-der-ostukraine-gefechte-in-donezk-und-russische-manoever-a-985353.html

Appears both Germany and the US coordinated the response which is as follows: crossing into the Ukraine under the supposedly guise of "a needed humanitarian operation under control of Russian troops" is a red line that cannot be crossed and Germany followed up that message when Merkel evidently called as well.

I appears that the argument by both the Russian mercenaries and the Russians that the humanitarian conditions in both the surrounded cities is a disaster meaning no food, medical supplies, eater or electricity has been disproved by a number of videos have come out today depicting full food store shelves and from residents that state yes there is water and electricity off and on but in general it still works.

So the Russian bluff has been called by the Ukrainians---now will be interesting to see how Putin responds as his mercenaries are actually losing.

[OUTLAW 09]

Looks like the "humanitarian assistance" bluff did not work so now we have the false flag artillery strikes into the Rostov area from areas generally being held by Russian irregulars and Russian GRU/SF troops.

http://en.ria.ru/world/20140810/191891933/About-15-Ukrainian-Munitions-Explode-in-Russias-Rostov-Region.html

[OUTLAW 09]

Concerning the Russian infowar---at the early outset of the infowar the Ukrainians released a chart depicting the connections between the various media companies/agencies, individuals and bloggers that were being used to spread info war materials. I posted that chart here early on.

What surprised me was an indication that an organization created by Ron Paul was being mentioned in the chart--- so I took it with a grain of salt.

But then this cropped up today in the US media questioning the information being released by the US alluding to the US not providing the "real truth about MH17" much in the same tones as what has been coming out of Moscow and Interfax/RIA. He had mentioned early on a similar statement which if one understands how the info war works certain messaging is being released on a steady basis.

So the chart might have been in fact correct as to who the global Russian info war players are.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/10/ron-paul-mh17-plane-crash_n_5665996.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

[kaur]

Pravda.ru claims that rebels ambushed American instructors in Ukraine :eek:

http://translate.google.be/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.pravda.ru/news/world/formerussr/ukraine/09-08-2014/1220385-donbass-0/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.pravda.ru/news/world/formerussr/ukraine/09-08-2014/1220385-donbass-0/%26biw%3D1024%26bih%3D425

[Dayuhan]

Dayuhan--you asked for what red lines have been crossed

I asked which specific red line you wish to link to your proposed economic threat.


False flag operations are a key corner stone of Russian politics since the 30s.

I know. I don't doubt for a moment that the Russians would use a false flag operation if they thought the circumstances called for it and if they thought they could get away with it. I just doubt that this case was one of them. There's just too much evidence - much of it posted by you - suggesting that the separatists believed they were shooting at a Ukrainian military plane. Why would a separatist leader gloat over the shooting with all that "we warned you not to fly in our skies" stuff if the target was an Aeroflot plane and the intention was to blame it on the Ukrainians?

[Dayuhan]

JMA---notice the Russian FM comments on "receiving the US call" concerning the "humanitarian convoy" that was not an "invasion force" from my previous link.

Cryptic was all one can say about his comment--would have been interesting to have learned what the US told Russia on that call? Word has it that just minutes after the US called the Russians informed the US that the convoy had indeed stopped.

If a mere phone call from the US can force the Russians to abort a plan, they must be seriously running scared, and whatever the US is doing must be working.


Secondly, I for one believe the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union was the price of Russian sour crude collapsing under pressure of the KSA that opened the flow of sour crude and drove the price down for a long period thus denying Russian an extremely large amount of cash flow that they had planned for their internal budget.

Thus the SU collapse---now what is interesting is who together with the KSA thought up that pricing maneuver?

The oil glut and the price crash were certainly a major cause of the Soviet collapse, but nobody "thought it up". If you look at the data it wasn't just the KSA that increased production: almost all producers did. The price started dropping, and producers pumped more to try to cover their budgets, depressing the price further. OPEC tried to stop it by tightening quotas, but the quotas were ignored, across the board. Classic case of short-term thinking and distrust for other members of the cartel: the interests of all would have been best served if everybody had cut production to support the price, but nobody trusted the others to follow their quotas and nobody wanted to be the fool who cut production and then got shot down by the combination of low production and a lower price.

The oil glut was catastrophic for all producers, including the Saudis; I don't think there's a serious oil analyst anywhere who believes that it was deliberately contrived as a weapon.

[JMA]

Russia is still trying to do the "humanitarian" invasion thing regardless of western warnings that such movements are in fact illegal because all necessary NGOs and the IRC are already inside the Ukraine.

Who will stop them?

[OUTLAW 09]

I asked which specific red line you wish to link to your proposed economic threat.



I know. I don't doubt for a moment that the Russians would use a false flag operation if they thought the circumstances called for it and if they thought they could get away with it. I just doubt that this case was one of them. There's just too much evidence - much of it posted by you - suggesting that the separatists believed they were shooting at a Ukrainian military plane. Why would a separatist leader gloat over the shooting with all that "we warned you not to fly in our skies" stuff if the target was an Aeroflot plane and the intention was to blame it on the Ukrainians?

See Dayuhan another reason that often when tearing comments apart one tends to overlook links that one is pointed towards.

Ukraine@war.blogspot.nl

One of the best open source analysis blogs I have seen on the Buk and the launch site. He and his work was used by the US government for their intl briefings as it was virtually the same style of work as done by an intel analyst.

He did the workup on the SBU new theory of the false flag and came to the opinion it made sense with the notice that there needed to be released by the SBU the alleged voice intercepts which they did by the way just after the shot down of the missile crew and potential photos which could be geo tagged.

He then invited "trolls" to challenge him and one did and failed badly.

That was the link I provided you and if you had worked your way through it this question would have been answered.

Having worked the intel world a long while in my career---when someone uses the term "makes sense" than pay attention---I had an old German WW2 intel officer mentor from the German Army Gehlen Intel Group when I started back in 70 who told me the human is capable of anything and if it makes sense to you believe him.

[OUTLAW 09]

Who will stop them?

JMA---would have agreed with you but the RIA comments by the Russian FM seems to indicate that something was said by the US and backed up by Germany that led to a 50 vehicle "humanitarian" protected by Russian Airborne/SF armor to come to a sudden halt meters from the border.

He simply stated "we got the comment" but did not go further into it.

So something was said in a manner that halted a moving convoy within minutes into the conversation as the US was informed during the conversation the convoy had halted.

Putin had to have been totally informed as a previous Interfax release earlier during the same day indicated he was handling the "humanitarian efforts" personally.

[OUTLAW 09]

If a mere phone call from the US can force the Russians to abort a plan, they must be seriously running scared, and whatever the US is doing must be working.


And Dayuhan why was there a common word used during that period "oil cartel" and it was being led by the KSA so what motivated the KSA to flood the market if pricing went lower which would cut into their earnings as well?

Think it though and ask the question why?

[Dayuhan]

And Dayuhan why was there a common word used during that period "oil cartel" and it was being led by the KSA so what motivated the KSA to flood the market if pricing went lower which would cut into their earnings as well?

I just explained that; possibly it wasn't clear.

Nobody really "led" OPEC at that point, because OPEC effectively collapsed. Its production quotas, its only tools for supporting the price, were voluntary and when countries ceased to follow them, the cartel lost all power.

What has to be understood is that this process started slowly. When prices dropped slightly, oil producers pumped more because their political masters wanted the money. When prices dropped a little more, they pumped even more, because the political masters still wanted more money.

If they were thinking long term and if they trusted each other, they could have all decided to cut back production and forced the price back up. They weren't thinking long term, and they didn't trust each other, so they didn't do that. They acted to bail themselves out in the short run, by pumping more and selling more. Once the spiral started they couldn't break out of it, largely because they didn't trust each other enough to cooperate.

As a result the US had a 10 year cheap oil joyride, the Soviet Union went broke, and oil producers everywhere had a very miserable decade, very much including the Saudis.

This has been picked apart in near infinite detail by oil industry analysts, and I don't know of anyone in that community who buys into the idea that the oil glut was intentionally contrived as a weapon. It had a lot to do with chaos, suspicion, and mistrust, not much to do with conspiracy.

[Dayuhan]

That was the link I provided you and if you had worked your way through it this question would have been answered.

I did look at the link. The trolls are very crude, but the blogger doesn't do much better. Someone asked:


the rebel leader wouldn't have known it was BUK and wouldn't have bragged to half DNR on the phone about it.

The blogger responds:


That was PART of the plan... them bragging about it. It would whitewash Russia.

That makes no sense at all... how would a Russian proxy bragging about shooting down a Russian plane "whitewash Russia"? It would do the opposite: Russia would look at least indirectly responsible. If the purpose was to blame the Ukrainian forces for shooting down a Russian plane, the bragging and gloating are completely incompatible with the plan... and why would Russia want to make the separatists look responsible?

The immediate post-shootdown gloating from the separatists is very well established, and it doesn't fit with the false flag conspiracy theories at all.

[OUTLAW 09]

I just explained that; possibly it wasn't clear.

Nobody really "led" OPEC at that point, because OPEC effectively collapsed. Its production quotas, its only tools for supporting the price, were voluntary and when countries ceased to follow them, the cartel lost all power.

What has to be understood is that this process started slowly. When prices dropped slightly, oil producers pumped more because their political masters wanted the money. When prices dropped a little more, they pumped even more, because the political masters still wanted more money.

If they were thinking long term and if they trusted each other, they could have all decided to cut back production and forced the price back up. They weren't thinking long term, and they didn't trust each other, so they didn't do that. They acted to bail themselves out in the short run, by pumping more and selling more. Once the spiral started they couldn't break out of it, largely because they didn't trust each other enough to cooperate.

As a result the US had a 10 year cheap oil joyride, the Soviet Union went broke, and oil producers everywhere had a very miserable decade, very much including the Saudis.

This has been picked apart in near infinite detail by oil industry analysts, and I don't know of anyone in that community who buys into the idea that the oil glut was intentionally contrived as a weapon. It had a lot to do with chaos, suspicion, and mistrust, not much to do with conspiracy.

Really Dayuhan you are still stating the KSA does not "guide nor influence" OPEC---even in times of overproduction which if you really do look at the numbers from that period-- then why did the two major producers of sour crude the exact same quality as that which comes out of the Urals overproduce?

Why would anyone cut their income deliberately via overproduction if that is what you are saying ---it was general overall overproduction that caused the low income earnings. The OPEC is smart enough to fully understand overproduction in a normal demand market does not lead to a great cash flow--so again why did they over produce?

Ask the question again why was there an over production strictly in sour crude when the refineries of the west could not handle the volume that was being offerred?

Ask the question again why did the market dip when the US made their recent sells of sour crude when in fact the general product sour crude was running fairly stable---why the price dip which exactly matched the US sales period of their reserve sour crude?

You really need to start asking the question why---until you fill in the why answer in ---all other questions such as who what when where and how jet unanswered into space---answer the why and then the answers to the above questions make sense.

[OUTLAW 09]

The same stolen white tractor trailer that long hauled the Buk SAM11 out of the Ukraine into Russia after downing MH17 is back again from Russia headed towards Donetsk with a T80 on the long haul trailer.

Man he is racking up the per diem and mileage these days---there must be even a night time hauling fee that he also gets as it rumored he is making the nightly runs quite often these days.

https://twitter.com/tombreadley/status/489164927517876224/photo/1

[Dayuhan]

Really Dayuhan you are still stating the KSA does not "guide nor influence" OPEC---even in times of overproduction which if you really do look at the numbers from that period-- then why did the two major producers of sour crude the exact same quality as that which comes out of the Urals overproduce?

Actually everbody was overproducing, of all types of crude: the various indices moved together and rarely deviated from each other by more than a very small percentage. The glut was in no way a phenomenon specific to any given type of crude.


Why would anyone cut their income deliberately via overproduction if that is what you are saying ---it was general overall overproduction that caused the low income earnings. The OPEC is smart enough to fully understand overproduction in a normal demand market does not lead to a great cash flow--so again why did they over produce?

Because they didn't trust each other. For all intents and purposes, the cartel ceased to function as a cartel, and become every producer for himself. At any given price point, pumping more earns you more. Of course you can push the price up if everybody cooperates... but they didn't cooperate. Of course by the 80s non-OPEC production was a majority of global production anyway, which cut into OPEC influence even more.


Ask the question again why was there an over production strictly in sour crude when the refineries of the west could not handle the volume that was being offerred?

Again, not correct: the glut extended across the entire spectrum of crude types.


Ask the question again why did the market dip when the US made their recent sells of sour crude when in fact the general product sour crude was running fairly stable---why the price dip which exactly matched the US sales period of their reserve sour crude?

Of course if you put oil on the market, the price will drop, unless somebody somewhere cuts back production to compensate. Of course the ability of the US to sustain those sales is limited, and everybody knows that releases from reserves will have to be replaced, creating excess demand that will drive prices back up.


You really need to start asking the question why---until you fill in the why answer in ---all other questions such as who what when where and how jet unanswered into space---answer the why and then the answers to the above questions make sense.

You need to stop assuming that everything that happens is the result of intentional planning.

This is a good general briefing on what went on:

http://www.e-ir.info/2012/12/28/world-oil-market-prices-and-crises/

These are key paragraphs:


One of the major factors causing overabundance of world oil was OPECs inability to limit its production sufficiently to support a given price level. Between 1979 and 1982, demand for OPEC oil dropped by 40 percent, consequently all members decreased production by at least 20 percent. Nearly all OPEC members bore the brunt of limiting production, although certain members made larger cuts: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Libya reducing output by 65 percent, 60 percent, and 50 percent respectively. Yet even with this drop in output, prices continued to fall. This put pressure on producers to make up for falling revenues by increasing their output.

Eventually, towards the end of 1985, Saudi Arabia announced that in riposte to other OPEC members’ repeated violations of their respective production quotas, it would no longer play the role of ‘swing producer’ and would instead attempt to increase its share of world oil by selling oil at whatever prices the market would bear. As OPEC abandoned all production and pricing agreements, OPEC output rose by 25 percent, between 1985 and 1986.[8] (Gately 1986: 241-242) Of course, this only added to the world oil glut, causing oil prices to fall below $10 a barrel, which in real terms is lower than the $3 per barrel price that prevailed before the 1973 price shock. (Georgiou 1987: 298)

It's all worth reading, though. Again, I don't think there's a single serious oil market analyst on the planet who buys your premise. Do you know of any?

EIA has a similar take:

http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/chronology/petroleumchronology2000.htm#T_10_

[AmericanPride]

Given this statement:


A snow balls chance in the after life of him negotiating over the "New Russia" that he himself called into existence in several of his key speeches if it means him losing face and his mercenaries laying down their arms as that signals a military defeat and Russia cannot under Putin suffer a military defeat.

Why do you insist on pursuing strategies that will lead to Russia opting for further escalation instead of de-escalation? If "Russia cannot under Putin suffer a military defeat", do you think it's wise to force the issue? What are the consequences for European and international security if this Russian red-line is crossed? Since you argue that Russia is a second-rate, rogue, criminal, irrational nuclear state with a reckless nuclear strategy, why do you keep expecting rational behavior to be the result of your proposals? Or have you not thought that far ahead yet?

[OUTLAW 09]

Given this statement:



Why do you insist on pursuing strategies that will lead to Russia opting for further escalation instead of de-escalation? If "Russia cannot under Putin suffer a military defeat", do you think it's wise to force the issue? What are the consequences for European and international security if this Russian red-line is crossed? Since you argue that Russia is a second-rate, rogue, criminal, irrational nuclear state with a reckless nuclear strategy, why do you keep expecting rational behavior to be the result of your proposals? Or have you not thought that far ahead yet?

And you think Russia is acting "rational". Come on AP.

http://en.inforesist.org/nsdc-shelling-from-russia-turns-ukrainian-villages-into-ruins/

[OUTLAW 09]

So AP Russia is again what acting "rational"?

Read the entire Ukrainian field reporting.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/11/anti-terrorist-operation-in-ukraine-summary-for-august-9-2014-2/

[OUTLAW 09]

So AP Russia is acting rational in claiming the IRC has together with Russia organized a humanitarian convoy--when the IRC was asked in Kiev---they had heard no plan had been approved by the IRC nor did they know of any plan for a Russian aid convoy.

AP ---does this sound like a "rational clear thinking Putin ie Russia"?

Remember what was said over on the Iraq thread---you look only at the big picture but fail to see the moving pieces---not good.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/11/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSKBN0GA0C620140811

Again AP work your way through the tweet traffic and you will notice a comment that Russian military vehicles that where green yesterday and now being painted white for a "humanitarian" operation"---also the comments if the Ukraine threatens to stop the Russia aid PR attempt that has not been cleared and or planned together with the IRC that Putin "claimed today they were planning together with" then the Russians will have their excuse to use military force to delivery the "humanitarian assistance".

So again AP you are being asked---is this the "rational" Russia that you claim is needed to be understood by the West so you can negotiate with it over exactly what AP?

https://twitter.com/hashtag/Russia?src=hash

And again AP--does this sound like a Russia wanting to work within the international norm or outside the norm? Why the urgency to get an aid convoy over the border when all other parties stat there is no IRC combined Russian IRC plan---sound rational to you AP?

http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140811/191919047/Russia-Urges-West-Not-to-Interfere-With-Humanitarian-Aid-to-East.html

[JMA]

If a mere phone call from the US can force the Russians to abort a plan, they must be seriously running scared, and whatever the US is doing must be working.

Good point.

The question that should be asked is why didn't the US make this persuasive call back when Russia first invaded Crimea?

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---here is an excellent example of what I have been calling Putin's/Russian altered state of reality.

It is amazingly dangerous when leaders of a country who are driving an information war start to believe their own propaganda--that is what I would all an altered state of reality.

Then couple that with the concept of cognitive dissonance and you have now an "irrational" country and AP all the negotiations in the world will not bring them out of that altered state of reality.

There have been countless false flag shelling of the last two towns controlled by the mercenaries in order to give Putin cover for his "humanitarian aid". They claim there is no food and water--and yet photos in social media depicts something other than no food and water.

AP really read the near hysteria of the Russian FM concerning the "humanitarian disaster" he is claiming exists. Look at his accusations against the position of the West--near hysteria--not good for a nuclear power in an altered state of reality.

So AP just how does one negotiate with an altered state of reality called Putin?

http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?pg=2&id=527696

[JMA]

Actually everbody was overproducing, ...

Why?

[AmericanPride]

Again AP--shifting gears out of the Iraq world that you knew nothing about to now the Ukraine where you are equally weak on.

And you think Russia is acting "rational". Come on AP.

http://en.inforesist.org/nsdc-shelling-from-russia-turns-ukrainian-villages-into-ruins/

Putin could drive a tank corps through the holes in your logic. On the one hand, you claim that Russia is a criminal, rogue, irrational state (armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons) and hell-bent on building a New Russia - and then on the other, you claim that escalation economic sanctions leading to the fiscal ruin of Russia will produce rational, favorable outcomes in Russian behavior.

Feel free to close that gap at any time.

[davidbfpo]

Three threads are closed to enable people to cool down and to enable a review. This one thread. I will endeavour to open the thread tomorrow.

[davidbfpo]

I have deleted three posts and edited slightly four posts.

[davidbfpo]

SWC has clearly set terms of reference and rules of engagement, which are all set out at:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/faq.php

SWC respects the right of members to post using psuedonyms. members are not required to provide an introduction on joining, nor are 'credentials' required. We are a "broad church" of experience, interests and standpoints. We are not a political board, although politics is ever present.

On a number of issues, in the past and today, members engagement changes and lurches into sniping or personal attacks. Members often contact a Moderator when concerned, a few post their dismay. It maybe appopriate for a Moderator to then take action.

SWC is open for non-members (with a few exceptions) to read and has an excellent reputation for its content. Sometimes the wrong word(s) can damage SWC.

[davidbfpo]

Within this blog are a number of interesting items, in particular - from my "armchair" - is the reported movement into Belarus of Russian troops to a position north of Kiev:http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-176-russian-aid-convoy-bound-for-kharkiv-border/#3748

[Nyxilis]

Ukraine said they wanted it coming through on a border they controlled for this 'humanitarian aid' shipment Russia has been talking about. So much bad information surrounding it on who's supposedly in control, where it's going, and yadda yadda.

Wonder if this is it, and if it is just an aide convoy. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be just food, medicine and the like. It would still be a public relations boost for Russia. Getting to play it up as hey, look we told the truth, helped these russians in the east, and of course plaster more real pictures of the conditions there.

Especially if it lets him start trying to send more... because the more he gets to send i have to wonder the next time how much of it would be kosher? It gives them the opportunity such things and I think the Ukrainians finally allowed one to come in because if they didn't it gave Russia more of an excuse to take a peacekeeping initiative.

[JMA]

As per my comment in another thread if this "comment" was so persuasive then why wasn't it used when Russia invaded the Crimea?



JMA---would have agreed with you but the RIA comments by the Russian FM seems to indicate that something was said by the US and backed up by Germany that led to a 50 vehicle "humanitarian" protected by Russian Airborne/SF armor to come to a sudden halt meters from the border.

He simply stated "we got the comment" but did not go further into it.

So something was said in a manner that halted a moving convoy within minutes into the conversation as the US was informed during the conversation the convoy had halted.

Putin had to have been totally informed as a previous Interfax release earlier during the same day indicated he was handling the "humanitarian efforts" personally.

[JMA]

Your second sentence is the weakest element of SWC.

Secondly I doubt if anyone is against the rules of engagement around here but it is the abysmal quality of the moderation with repeated examples of bias that degrades SWC.

As to posts that you see fit to edit. It should be the norm for the 'editor' to idicate that the post has been edited and why. This Soviet style censorship in unacceptable IMHO.


SWC has clearly set terms of reference and rules of engagement, which are all set out at:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/faq.php

SWC respects the right of members to post using psuedonyms. members are not required to provide an introduction on joining, nor are 'credentials' required. We are a "broad church" of experience, interests and standpoints. We are not a political board, although politics is ever present.

On a number of issues, in the past and today, members engagement changes and lurches into sniping or personal attacks. Members often contact a Moderator when concerned, a few post their dismay. It maybe appopriate for a Moderator to then take action.

SWC is open for non-members (with a few exceptions) to read and has an excellent reputation for its content. Sometimes the wrong word(s) can damage SWC.

[Bill Moore]

JMA

Out of respect for allowing discourse where commenters could and should criticize or support other's ideas the mods (myself included) have been reluctant to crackdown on individuals. However, over the past two or more months SWJ discussions have too often degenerated into little more than personal attacks with no substance.

As a mode I'm going to start deleting posts that are little more than personal attacks. Explanation will be that is a personal attack and it isn't authorized, regardless of who posts it.

I will also delete posts that challenges to others experiences, such as how many languages you speak, or have you lived overseas, or do you have combat experience. We had a wide range of members with combat experience, students, academics, citizens interested in national defense, etc. They are all welcome to post and share their ideas.

That doesn't mean thin skinned people will be like engaging in the SWJ council, because their ideas will certainly be challenged and often bluntly. That is a lot different than attacking the individual.

If personal attacks continue, we'll ban that individual for the greater good.

[OUTLAW 09]

Putin could drive a tank corps through the holes in your logic. On the one hand, you claim that Russia is a criminal, rogue, irrational state (armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons) and hell-bent on building a New Russia - and then on the other, you claim that escalation economic sanctions leading to the fiscal ruin of Russia will produce rational, favorable outcomes in Russian behavior.

Feel free to close that gap at any time.

AP---regardless of how you spin it--you do realize Russia is in an undeclared war with the Ukraine fought with Russian troops and irregulars using UW in support to it's political warfare to the tune of 15K fighters --the figure given by the irregulars themselves who are receiving MRL/artillery strike support almost daily by the Russian Army firing into the Ukraine and Russia is actively sending in heavy weapons.

So again you do know what an undeclared war is and the same for political warfare and you know as well the new Russian UW military doctrine-with all eight steps of which we are seeing currently the first four steps in play-right?

You plead for negotiations and do not want a war---negotiations over what and if you think the sanctions will not work as you seem to state --so again AP what is left for you to suggest as solutions.

Sell apples on the street and use the money to purchase back the Crimea and eastern Ukraine?

Come on AP you have got to have better solutions--especially since the article you referenced is really a disguised lanced Russian land for land proposal and this is what the "success" of negotiations --ask the Ukrainians if they think it will work?

Again you do know what an undeclared war is right?

[JMA]

I would be interested in know whether there is a code of conduct for moderators? If there is, it should be publically available. If not it would explain why there is no consistency and some cases some pretty unethical conduct by moderators.

It may not be apparent to you but an individuals background and experience is absolutely critical to his ability to comment on a subject. Your example of combat... no one who has not been involved in significant combat can possibly matters relating with any seriousness. Surely you understand this?


JMA

Out of respect for allowing discourse where commenters could and should criticize or support other's ideas the mods (myself included) have been reluctant to crackdown on individuals. However, over the past two or more months SWJ discussions have too often degenerated into little more than personal attacks with no substance.

As a mode I'm going to start deleting posts that are little more than personal attacks. Explanation will be that is a personal attack and it isn't authorized, regardless of who posts it.

I will also delete posts that challenges to others experiences, such as how many languages you speak, or have you lived overseas, or do you have combat experience. We had a wide range of members with combat experience, students, academics, citizens interested in national defense, etc. They are all welcome to post and share their ideas.

That doesn't mean thin skinned people will be like engaging in the SWJ council, because their ideas will certainly be challenged and often bluntly. That is a lot different than attacking the individual.

If personal attacks continue, we'll ban that individual for the greater good.

[OUTLAW 09]

IMO this thread is a waste of time as it is spinning around in a circle.

In some aspects this was foreseen by JMA when the proposals to expand the topics was made.

It is difficult often to keep track on multiple threads on the same topic/sub topics as actually many comments bleed into others so one loses easily the oversight.

Actually the events in the Ukraine are running it's course anyway until the dust settles by winter.

[OUTLAW 09]

As per my comment in another thread if this "comment" was so persuasive then why wasn't it used when Russia invaded the Crimea?

Good question---maybe the fear of an open ended war triggered it.

[mirhond]

Georgian(volunteer?) on the Ukrainian side

http://scout-thedeaddistrict.blogspot.ru/2014/08/blog-post_2.html

One Swede, one Georgian - it would be nice to put them in one grave.

[Dayuhan]

The question that should be asked is why didn't the US make this persuasive call back when Russia first invaded Crimea?

Impossible to answer without knowing what was said and what else was going on at the time.


Why?

Because they desperately needed money, and efforts to support the price by cutting production had failed catastrophically. The cartel broke. Cartels often do when under stress.

[Dayuhan]

I think we all understand that this is not just "humanitarian aid", but...

Can the Russians bring in enough force in this convoy to change the momentum in the conflict? Outlaw estimated elsewhere that 500-600 individuals will be involved, but haven't the Russians already infiltrated much larger numbers? Is it a game changer, or a face saver?

Is it possible that the convoy is intended not to bring military aid, but to provoke the Ukrainians into stopping it, which could then serve as a pretext for more aggressive action? I don't know how devious the Russians are prepared to be, but it would be a huge embarrassment for the Ukraine if they descended on the convoy with full armed force only to discover (publicly, of course) that there's nothing remotely military about it. The Russians could then accuse the Ukraine of obstructing humanitarian aid and use that to justify forcing an opening... or is that too convoluted to enter their minds?

Not trying to imply an answer, just looking for opinions.

[Bill Moore]

I would be interested in know whether there is a code of conduct for moderators? If there is, it should be publically available. If not it would explain why there is no consistency and some cases some pretty unethical conduct by moderators.

It may not be apparent to you but an individuals background and experience is absolutely critical to his ability to comment on a subject. Your example of combat... no one who has not been involved in significant combat can possibly matters relating with any seriousness. Surely you understand this?

There is a major difference between perspective and ability. We don't prohibit people from posting their perspectives or opinions based on their experience. You are encouraged to challenge their views, but you can't attack them personally because of their view, and you can't tell them they can't post because they don't have experience or expertise. In fact, if you change your approach you have a great opportunity to use your experience to educate others. If they disagree you, then you just have to live with it like the rest of us.

[mirhond]

Is it possible that the convoy is intended not to bring military aid, but to provoke the Ukrainians into stopping it, which could then serve as a pretext for more aggressive action? I don't know how devious the Russians are prepared to be, but it would be a huge embarrassment for the Ukraine if they descended on the convoy with full armed force only to discover (publicly, of course) that there's nothing remotely military about it. The Russians could then accuse the Ukraine of obstructing humanitarian aid and use that to justify forcing an opening... or is that too convoluted to enter their minds?

Not trying to imply an answer, just looking for opinions.

You have vivid imagination ;) Major channels several hours before reported that convoy is to cross the border near Kharkov, trucks get Ukrainian plates and crews.

[mirhond]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m7hk-nO5waQ/U-rlnYN1HYI/AAAAAAAAdtk/B3wNXsjGglU/s1600/OcjpX4j1m24.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lPTPlTGJdQ4/U-rlSEf9B5I/AAAAAAAAdtc/jaFek-HxuQk/s1600/1407865720_3.jpg

Putin might be a dick, but this georgian guy is now as good as dead.

upd. Crap, there are a lot of dead guys with such plastic carpets, so this particular adventurer is probably alive and well.

[Nyxilis]

You have vivid imagination ;) Major channels several hours before reported that convoy is to cross the border near Kharkov, trucks get Ukrainian plates and crews.

See, what major channels? Russian? Because multiple EU, US, Japanese and Ukraine sources are saying different on their news channels.

In fact to quote Ukraine: "No humanitarian convoy of Putin's will be allowed to cross the territory of the Kharkiv region," Ukraine's interior minister Arsen Avakov wrote on Facebook. "Provocation by the cynical aggressor will not be permitted on our territory."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/08/13/ukraine-crisis-convoy-idINKBN0GD0P320140813

[Nyxilis]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28768746


But the BBC's Daniel Sandford in Moscow says that long discussions are continuing about whether the lorries will actually be allowed to enter.

Hardly so much has been confirmed, everyone is squabbling around it and way it's looking right now all those trucks might get passed off.

Those trucks mostly mean, to me, Russia is disengaging. Putin gets to look like, hey I'm doing stuff. Within my means. Food and stuff. Will give him leeway when sending more. Keep himself kosher with the Russian population in the east for essentially 'abandoning them'. Because if he doesn't invade, and Ukraine finishes off the rebels, and they will unless Russia comes, they're not going to like him much anymore either.

[BayonetBrant]

I'm just going to set this down here, and walk away :)

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/the-kremlins-troll-army/375932/

excerpt:

The Kremlin, which has waged a massive disinformation campaign aimed at legitimizing Russia's annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, has employed so-called "troll armies" to invade online territories armed with pro-Moscow rhetoric.

A June article by Max Seddon of BuzzFeed reported the Kremlin was spending millions of dollars to pay English-speaking Russians to promote President Vladimir Putin and his policies in U.S. media like Fox News broadcasting and The Huffington Post and Politico news sites. Trolls are reportedly expected to manage multiple fake accounts and post on news articles 50 times a day, often with sentiments as simplistic as "Putin makes Obama look stupid and weak!"

In order to promote its narrative, the Kremlin has adopted a two-fisted strategy, unleashing its troll armies even as it tightens Internet restrictions at home. On August 1, Russia enacted controversial new legislation aimed at muzzling social media, the last bastion of the country's embattled opposition and a free flow of information about the war in Ukraine.

Anton Nosik, a popular Russian blogger and programmer who is sometimes referred to as the "father of the Russian Internet," says the Kremlin is falling back on a time-honored strategy in its propaganda war on Ukraine. But this time, he says, the stakes are higher than ever before. (BuzzFeed reports that at least one trolling company—Internet Research Agency in St. Petersburg—is expected to spend more than $10 million in 2014 alone.)

"Comments were already serving as a well-financed Kremlin instrument of war against the opposition, even five years ago," he says. "So what's going on now is nothing new. But what's absolutely clear is that now they're spending more money on Ukraine than they ever spent against Alexei Navalny, or Ekho Moskvy, Kommersant, Gazeta.ru"—Russian media actors who have been targeted by the Kremlin in the past—"and all the rest."

[mirhond]

In fact to quote Ukraine: "No humanitarian convoy of Putin's will be allowed to cross the territory of the Kharkiv region," Ukraine's interior minister Arsen Avakov wrote on Facebook. "Provocation by the cynical aggressor will not be permitted on our territory."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/08/13/ukraine-crisis-convoy-idINKBN0GD0P320140813

I'd rather believe Poroshenko's Executive Office


Украина не возражает против участия России в работе гуманитарной миссии в Луганск и область. Об этом заявил заместитель главы Администрации Президента Украины Валерий Чалый в эфире телеканала ICTV в понедельник, 11 августа.
Ukraine doesn't object to Russian participation in humanitarian mission to Lugansk, said Deputy Head of Executive Office Valeri Chalyi, 11 Aug.

http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/3404510-ukrayna-ne-vozrazhaet-protyv-uchastyia-rf-v-humanytarnoi-myssyy-dlia-luhanska-admynystratsyia-prezydenta

then Facebook minister Avakov who is well-known liar and clown.

[JMA]

Impossible to answer without knowing what was said and what else was going on at the time.

LOL... loyal to the end.

Caught unawares, dithering, scared, etc.

History will show whether the CIA provided advanced warning or failed again. Either way it has been a Keystone Cops situation.

[Dayuhan]

LOL... loyal to the end.

Caught unawares, dithering, scared, etc.

History will show whether the CIA provided advanced warning or failed again. Either way it has been a Keystone Cops situation.

We still have no idea what was said in this rumored phone call, or to what extent the rumored call was responsible for a change in Russian plans. Given that lack of knowledge I can't see how the incident can be used as a basis for a conclusion, unless of course you've already reached the conclusion.

[JMA]

We still have no idea what was said in this rumored phone call, or to what extent the rumored call was responsible for a change in Russian plans. Given that lack of knowledge I can't see how the incident can be used as a basis for a conclusion, unless of course you've already reached the conclusion.

Likewise.

[OUTLAW 09]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m7hk-nO5waQ/U-rlnYN1HYI/AAAAAAAAdtk/B3wNXsjGglU/s1600/OcjpX4j1m24.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lPTPlTGJdQ4/U-rlSEf9B5I/AAAAAAAAdtc/jaFek-HxuQk/s1600/1407865720_3.jpg

Putin might be a dick, but this georgian guy is now as good as dead.

upd. Crap, there are a lot of dead guys with such plastic carpets, so this particular adventurer is probably alive and well.



comrade mirhond---here is a report that your favorite Russian commander from the FSB/GRU is evidently seriously wounded by a Ukrainian Seal team.

so much for quality Russian mercenaries.

https://twitter.com/MrKovalenko?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fukrainea twar.blogspot.com%2F&profile_id=383145741&tw_i=499634558493810688&tw_p=embeddedtimeline&tw_w=467270919530876928

[OUTLAW 09]

mirhond---another report for you to mull over---titled Russian PM comments against Putin "hacked and or drunk"


East of Brussels @EastOfBrussels · 3h

#Russia's PM says he's ashamed of #Putin's government, resigns. Yes, hacked or Dmitry is really drunk ;) #ukraine

[OUTLAW 09]

It appears now from Russian sources that the second top Russian mercenary has been wounded---one now in each of the last two mercenary held towns.

True story, fake story or the exit plan being put into play?

Secondly---there have been a series of tweets suggesting that the drivers are from an elite armored unit and will remain inside the Ukraine and others will drive back--there have been multiple reports recently of a large number of tanks parked in the surrounding areas in the forests but they have no more mercenary crews for them.

OSCE web site reports uniformed personnel w/no markings are crossing the border where their teams are reporting from.

Wounding link Russian news source;

http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1378586

[davidbfpo]

This FT article is behind a registration 'wall', which allows limited access:
In an anonymous military classroom somewhere in Moscow, 12 portraits in identical tortoiseshell frames stand on a metal bench placed on a dais. In front of each picture is a bunch of six roses, red and pink. The dead.....were operatives of Russian special forces. All 12 died in Ukraine in recent weeks. Officially, they were all on holiday.


It ends citing Nigel Inkster, of IISS, ex-SIS (MI6):
It is about subversion, it is about espionage with limited use of deniable special forces and the use of deniable proxies...It is a war that is never really declared.


Link:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f28913f6-1d8f-11e4-8f0c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3AMNKyZaz

[OUTLAW 09]

Have not seen the confirmation geo tag on this photo posted today--but it appears that two Russian Buk command vehicles pulled up directly behind the supposedly "humanitarian aid convoy" parked now near the mercenary crossing points not controlled by the Ukraine.

So much for the Putin statement that the "aid" delivery had been planned and approved by the ICRC who evidently is still awaiting the accurate load out details on each truck from Moscow---or maybe the ICRC just requested Buk air defense in case they were attacked by 'little green men" from Mars?

Mars.https://twitter.com/courtneymoscow/status/499871131915264000/photo/1

More Russia AD equipment (photos in the tweets) trailing behind the "humanitarian aid" convoy accompanied by two armed Russia copters.

http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-178-russian-aid-convoy-on-the-move-again/

That looks like a 9K22 Tunguska mounted to a Kamaz truck. It is an anti-aircraft weapon equipped with both missiles and 30mm guns. The missiles are capable of knocking out low-altitude aircraft flying at under 3,500 meters, though missile variants have a range up to 10 kilometers. and the guns could be used to target low-flying aircraft, incoming projectiles, or even ground forces. When used in combination with more advanced missile systems which have been spotted in the area, the 9k22 is a formidable addition to Russia's forces in the area.

[OUTLAW 09]

This FT article is behind a registration 'wall', which allows limited access:


It ends citing Nigel Inkster, of IISS, ex-SIS (MI6):


Link:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f28913f6-1d8f-11e4-8f0c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3AMNKyZaz

David---interesting in that it confirms something I passed onto Dave Maxwell referencing the military reset of Ukrainian military doctrine focusing more on Ukrainian SF and guerilla warfare being exercised now by these units.

1. there was a small blog comment mentioned once last week of a guerrilla unit in Donetsk killing over 30 mercenaries in random ambushes forcing the mercenaries to always move in groups. Never talked about since.

2. Monday another small blog comment indicating another 60 killed mercenaries from a "local defense group" inside Donetsk.

3. the separatist announcement/denials then Russian media announcements of the serious wounding of two of their major Russian mercenaries---a Ukrainian announcement mentioned that one had bee shot by a Ukrainian Seal team.

4. Ukrainian SBU announced on Monday that during a raid on what seemed a normal irregular checkpoint killing all at the checkpoint turned out to be a raid killing an entire Russian Army SF team.
.
There seems to be a very focused attempt by the Ukrainian special operations (Alpha, former Alpha, Ukrainian SF and Airborne) to identify Russian SF types-- then raid and kill them--seems capture is not in the picture on these raids.

Seems the Russian losses in the GRU/SF area is climbing the longer the fighting goes on.

[OUTLAW 09]

The Dutch blogger who has been doing some great open source analysis posted an analysis of the Russian military firing heavy artillery into the Ukraine and geo located a number of points.

Although Russia claims "it ain't me"---it is those crazy Ukrainians who cannot shot straight.

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/

[OUTLAW 09]

Same Dutch blogger posted a link to high resolution photos taken by a Russian military UAV as it surveyed the Ukrainian humanitarian aid convoy on the go.

This is the first release I have seen of the capability of this particular Russian military UAV.

djp3tros @djp3tros

This is how #Russia uses UAV: Highres photo taken of #Ukraine convoy with ТОЧКА-У http://i65.fastpic.ru/big/2014/0814/cd/_e35cedccaa94224832dba7c49c2757cd.jpg?noht=1 …
https://twitter.com/MilitaryMaps/status/499854246406520832/photo/1

[OUTLAW 09]

Ukrainian Army captures small Russian lightweight secure satcom system Р-438М normally used by GRU recon/sabotage units and the Russian SF.

http://inforesist.org/rf-perepravlyaet-v-ukrainu-malogabaritnye-stancii-sputnikovoj-svyazi/

[OUTLAW 09]

An interesting read on the "aid convoy" and Putin's options.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/08/14/eyeball-to-eyeball-russian-humanitarian-convoy-approached-unguarded-border-with-ukrainian-tanks-moving-to-meet-them/

[Firn]

Hagel Donner und andere Raketen (http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/ukraine-konflikt-hagel-donner-und-andere-raketen-13096537.html)


Moskau hatte die OSZE aufgefordert, sich ein Bild von der Situation im Grenzgebiet zu machen, auch aufgrund des angeblichen Beschusses von ukrainischer Seite aus. Ratschewa berichtete, am 25. Juli sei von ukrainischer Seite aus ein kleines russisches Dorf mit Artillerie beschossen worden, kurz, nachdem ein Team des Staatsfernsehens dort eingetroffen sei. Das laesst einen Beschuss durch die Separatisten vermuten, fr die das Staatsfernsehen stets Partei ergreift.

This would fit other stories of (Pro)Russian shelling in false flag operations Russian villages or Ukrainian blocks. Obviously there is no smoking gun of which we know and in some cases in the Donbass the Ukrainians are likely trying to blame the other side for damage and death caused by their artillery fire.


Ratschewa wurde im Grenzgebiet auch vom Geheimdienst FSB verhoert. Whrend des Gespraechs im Dorf Kujbyschewo im suedrussischen Gebiet Rostow habe sie deutlich Artilleriegeschosse gehoert. Es habe geklungen, als seien sie im Nachbarhof abgefeuert worden. Die Beamten htten die Geraeusche auf Nachfrage, ob es sich nicht um Raketen des russischen Typs Grad (Hagel) handele, erst als Donner, dann als Salutschuesse bezeichnet. Ratschewa traf auch Soldaten, die sich im einzigen Cafe des Dorfes vergngten. Einer von ihnen, der mit einer Militruniform ohne Kennzeichnung, wie sie russische Spezialkrfte tragen, bekleidet gewesen sei, habe sich ihr als Dagestaner vorgestellt und gesagt, man bleibe vor Ort, so lange es das Vaterland wuensche. In der Naehe hoerte die Reporterin Raketen aus russischer Richtung in Richtung des ukrainischen Dorfes Marinowka fliegen und sah die Einschlaege dort.

This is fruther direct confirmation of what we already know for sure, Russia attacking Ukrainian forces from Russian territory with gun and rocket artillery.

[Maeda Toshiie]

David---interesting in that it confirms something I passed onto Dave Maxwell referencing the military reset of Ukrainian military doctrine focusing more on Ukrainian SF and guerilla warfare being exercised now by these units.

1. there was a small blog comment mentioned once last week of a guerrilla unit in Donetsk killing over 30 mercenaries in random ambushes forcing the mercenaries to always move in groups. Never talked about since.

2. Monday another small blog comment indicating another 60 killed mercenaries from a "local defense group" inside Donetsk.

3. the separatist announcement/denials then Russian media announcements of the serious wounding of two of their major Russian mercenaries---a Ukrainian announcement mentioned that one had bee shot by a Ukrainian Seal team.

4. Ukrainian SBU announced on Monday that during a raid on what seemed a normal irregular checkpoint killing all at the checkpoint turned out to be a raid killing an entire Russian Army SF team.
.
There seems to be a very focused attempt by the Ukrainian special operations (Alpha, former Alpha, Ukrainian SF and Airborne) to identify Russian SF types-- then raid and kill them--seems capture is not in the picture on these raids.

Seems the Russian losses in the GRU/SF area is climbing the longer the fighting goes on.

I wonder if it would be better to capture these Russian SF and parade them on the streets of Kiev. Too provocative?

[OUTLAW 09]

I wonder if it would be better to capture these Russian SF and parade them on the streets of Kiev. Too provocative?

Maybe six months ago but the Ukrainian government is fighting for the survival of the Ukraine and there is now no lost love for Russian troops- mercenary or otherwise.

[OUTLAW 09]

Appears that the Russian Army last night drove 23 APCs with troops across the Ukrainian border into the separatist zone and are holding their positions---being reported by UK media via German media.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine-abroad/the-telegraph-russian-armoured-vehicles-and-military-trucks-cross-border-into-ukraine-360709.html

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/gepanzerte-begleitfahrzeuge-des-konvois-in-der-ukraine-a-986206.html

Appears that Russia seems to be dead set in forcing a "aid convoy" across the border in the face of all statements specially made to them by the West and the ICRC so it appears that all Russian comments by their FM and Putin seem to be somewhat incorrect to say the least.

This would reflect the adding of Russian AD assets to their "aid convoy" along with having armed copter escorts.

Late reports coming out seem to indicate the UA was able to take control of a town that sits directly on the Russian resupply road from Russia which is the only road into a surrounded town they are trying to bring "aid" to.

Also a number of reports are coming out since yesterday that all mercenary units are extremely low on ammunition and food themselves.

[OUTLAW 09]

This particular reporter has been dogging the aid convoy and sent this morning several photos taken from outside looking into the long haul trailers some of which appeared to be mostly empty.

Will be interesting to hear what the Ukrainian and IRC say after each individual truck clearance is finished.

Begs the question what happened to the supposedly 2000 tons of aid or is the convoy a decoy?

https://twitter.com/WeAreUkraine/status/500210000472862721/photo/1

Based on this tweet--Ukrainian Border Guards are saying more than half of the trucks are empty---begs the next question was in there in fact "military aid" and it was off loaded at the military installation they RONed the previous night?

https://twitter.com/TarasKuzio/statuses/500227379135283200

One has to like social media for speed.

[OUTLAW 09]

Appears that the Russian Army last night drove 23 APCs with troops across the Ukrainian border into the separatist zone and are holding their positions---being reported by UK media via German media.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine-abroad/the-telegraph-russian-armoured-vehicles-and-military-trucks-cross-border-into-ukraine-360709.html


Let's see where this story is right now:

1. two videos one from the UK showing the APCs and personnel crossing into the Ukraine have been posted on social media and geo tagged as confirmed
2. Donetsk Russian border guards confirming to reporters this morning that yes a mobile unit crossed "but" it was to protect Russian civilians from the Ukrainian shellings which have been proven to be false flag attacks---and in the general area of those shellings there are no UA/BG/BG units
3. the Ukrainian military states --it happens often lately we just get tab on what stays behind


And how do we know it is absolutely true:

The FSB made today in ITAS-Isvestia Online a public statement in the front page that it is all lies as no Russian troops and or APCs crossed into the Ukraine last night.

[OUTLAW 09]

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine-abroad/the-telegraph-russian-armoured-vehicles-and-military-trucks-cross-border-into-ukraine-360709.html


Let's see where this story is right now:

1. two videos one from the UK showing the APCs and personnel crossing into the Ukraine have been posted on social media and geo tagged as confirmed
2. Donetsk Russian border guards confirming to reporters this morning that yes a mobile unit crossed "but" it was to protect Russian civilians from the Ukrainian shellings which have been proven to be false flag attacks---and in the general area of those shellings there are no UA/BG/BG units
3. the Ukrainian military states --it happens often lately we just get tab on what stays behind


And how do we know it is absolutely true:

The FSB made today in ITAS-Isvestia Online a public statement in the front page that it is all lies as no Russian troops and or APCs crossed into the Ukraine last night.

Now we know the "truth" the Russian FSB announced in ITAS-Isvestia Online that there were no Russian troops/APCs inside the Ukraine---they now say they have "mobile Border Guard Troops" "to protect against Ukrainian troops from crossing into Russia and to stop Ukrainian shelling".

No mention through of stopping Russian mercenaries and heavy weapons from crossing into the Ukraine from Russia?

http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140815/192038090/Russia-Deploys-Mobile-Border-Guard-Teams-to-Border-With-Ukraine-.html

[OUTLAW 09]

Tweets from same UK Telegraph journalist who reported the Russian APCs crossing into the Ukraine last night.

Evidently a lot more APCs heading to the Russian border passed the parked "aid" convoy.

From this early evening:

https://twitter.com/RolandOliphant/status/500278657953591297/photo/1

These guys. Lots of them.

Roland Oliphant @RolandOliphant · 56m

Which military district is a 76 license plate from?

Roland Oliphant @RolandOliphant · 58m

Massive column of APCs flying Russian flags and some with мc - peace keeper -driving past aid convoy and barrelling it toward Donetsk

[mirhond]

I wonder if it would be better to capture these Russian SF and parade them on the streets of Kiev. Too provocative?

It's very strange that you are missing the most obvious option - there are no "Russian SF" to parade for two reasons - no one have been ever captured, or no one have ever stepped on Ukrainian soil.
(like you don't have a dissected pody of a porn star in you bathtube not because of CIA removed it while you blink and destroed any evidence, but because there was no pody in the first place ^_^ )

[OUTLAW 09]

It's very strange that you are missing the most obvious option - there are no "Russian SF" to parade for two reasons - no one have been ever captured, or no one have ever stepped on Ukrainian soil.
(like you don't have a dissected pody of a porn star in you bathtube not because of CIA removed it while you blink and destroed any evidence, but because there was no pody in the first place ^_^ )


let us see mirhond--no Russian military has set foot on Ukrainian soli?

can you then explain how this Russian carrying his Russian military service book showing his service starting 7 July 2014 ended up n the Ukraine captured by the SBU?

http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/en/publish/article?art_id=130051&cat_id=35317

must have been those little green men again from Mars--what mirhond?

at least get your facts straight--forgot you work for the same FSB that stated today no Russian APCs crossed into the Ukraine even though there are two quality videos showing they corssed

[OUTLAW 09]

It's very strange that you are missing the most obvious option - there are no "Russian SF" to parade for two reasons - no one have been ever captured, or no one have ever stepped on Ukrainian soil.
(like you don't have a dissected pody of a porn star in you bathtube not because of CIA removed it while you blink and destroed any evidence, but because there was no pody in the first place ^_^ )

let us see your "truth" again mirhond:

this Russian lightweight GRU/Russian SF radio just what---grew two legs and walked all the way from Moscow to be what "captured" in the Ukraine?

http://inforesist.org/rf-perepravlyaet-v-ukrainu-malogabaritnye-stancii-sputnikovoj-svyazi/

come on mirhond at least get your facts correct


so mirhond ---this is not the correct location of a Russian mercenary training camp 800 meters from the Russian border? see mirhond---just how easy it is to speak the "truth" these days?

you have got to convince Russian mercenaries to stop posting to the internet---seems that they do no understand the tools available to geo tag these days.

https://bellingcat.com/resources/case-studies/2014/08/15/how-to-locate-a-secret-pro-russian-training-camp/

maybe you can pass on the training in order to improve your arguments

[OUTLAW 09]

So were those supposedly non Russian 23 APCs that did not cross the border into the Ukraine get destroyed by that non Ukrainian artillery that the Russians call a farce of a story?

http://www.businessinsider.com/everything-we-know-about-chaos-in-ukraine-2014-8

[Ray]

I'm just going to set this down here, and walk away :)

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/the-kremlins-troll-army/375932/

excerpt:


Actually Obama has achieved this:


How Obama Is Driving Russia and China Together
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-obama-driving-russia-china-together-10735



Five Ways Russia Could Help China's Military Become Even Deadlier
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/five-ways-russia-could-help-chinas-military-become-even-11000

[kaur]

SBU published yesterday intercepted call between FSB officer in Crimea and rebel in Donetsk (according to his text it seems that he is from Crimea also). Rebel tells FSB guy that everything is f...ed up and peoples' support is zero. First person (nickname for Girkin/Strelok) is under the influence of Russian orthodox sect and this is very bad. Some rebel groups are just stealing cars and selling the stuff in Russia. Donetsk has been devided to influence zones between different goups to carry out criminal activities. Rebel says that there is nothing to do. He should return to Crimea to deal with Tatars there. He says also that he has already organised his agentura in Donetsk and through this set he can organise resistance in the future. FSB guy offers to rebel exfil through Rostov oblast border crossing points, where his colleague can arrange safe crossing.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ow5sEsSyI4

Rebel says that his agentura should go to Russia for training and arming and after infiltration should carry out attacks against Ukrainian forces. Rebel says that this should take place in Perevalnoe (This is "legendary" Ukrainian military base in Crimea, that was under siege of Russian troops in March).

Video about Russian troops in Perevalnoe https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GzTV0tuQUzI

Cossacks in action in Perevalnoe http://navoine.info/crimea-ryb-2.html

One pic shows the commander of Russian troops and he has forgotten to remove Russian insignia from the hat. Otherwise he is normal green polite person.

[OUTLAW 09]

This was the FTs headlines for today---70 Russian vehicles identified by NATO crossing into the Ukraine---attacked by artillery and the Ukrainians are claiming 70destroyed. No wonder the UK called in the Russian Ambassador yesterday to explain the Russian response ---"was ain't us that crossed".

Can someone tell me why the Russian Defense Minister/Putin do not think the NATO/US AWACs and E3s do not carry GMTI sensors onboard?

https://twitter.com/NATOSource/status/500376253430792192/photo/1

[OUTLAW 09]

SBU published yesterday intercepted call between FSB officer in Crimea and rebel in Donetsk (according to his text it seems that he is from Crimea also). Rebel tells FSB guy that everything is f...ed up and peoples' support is zero. First person (nickname for Girkin/Strelok) is under the influence of Russian orthodox sect and this is very bad. Some rebel groups are just stealing cars and selling the stuff in Russia. Donetsk has been devided to influence zones between different goups to carry out criminal activities. Rebel says that there is nothing to do. He should return to Crimea to deal with Tatars there. He says also that he has already organised his agentura in Donetsk and through this set he can organise resistance in the future. FSB guy offers to rebel exfil through Rostov oblast border crossing points, where his colleague can arrange safe crossing.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ow5sEsSyI4

Rebel says that his agentura should go to Russia for training and arming and after infiltration should carry out attacks against Ukrainian forces. Rebel says that this should take place in Perevalnoe (This is "legendary" Ukrainian military base in Crimea, that was under siege of Russian troops in March).

Video about Russian troops in Perevalnoe https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GzTV0tuQUzI

Cossacks in action in Perevalnoe http://navoine.info/crimea-ryb-2.html

One pic shows the commander of Russian troops and he has forgotten to remove Russian insignia from the hat. Otherwise he is normal green polite person.

Also in that same intercept quoted also by the German Der Spiegel today ---was the mention that the mercenaries can not hold out past the end of this month.

This is an interesting comment as there have been several blog comments indicating that coming out of the ATO are comments stating that some of the mercenary units are trying to pull back into Russia stating 19 August.

Yesterday one of the "independent BNs" working with the UA reported 45 Cossacks surrendered to them and they were handed over to the UA and SBU.

[OUTLAW 09]

This is why the Ukraine did not trust the "aid" convoy which were Russian military trucks repainted white and driven by those "little men in tan".

Amazing what fits into a commercial long hauler these days?

https://twitter.com/Dbnmjr/status/500370750218706944/photo/1

[kaur]

FSB guy Girkin/Strelok went to vacation. According to Borodai, he'll be back in a month. Some think that this is too late for Donetsk. According to intercept Crimean FSB guy calls his man back, Girkin has disappeared and Borodai is now deputy PM instead PM. I'll not wonder, if he will disappear next. What is the plan?

[OUTLAW 09]

FSB guy Girkin/Strelok went to vacation. According to Borodai, he'll be back in a month. Some think that this is too late for Donetsk. According to intercept Crimean FSB guy calls his man back, Girkin has disappeared and Borodai is now deputy PM instead PM. I'll not wonder, if he will disappear next. What is the plan?

kaur---there is a serious rumor floating around about the following;

Both were told by the FSB either you toe the line and do as we say or you are out---they requested repeatedly and both refused to toe the line and then you noticed just before they "resigned" the lanced articles that both had been wounded--Girkin was in theory seriously wounded---which had been denied by the separatist leadership.

Then suddenly they resigned. And then the "vacation".

Both were replaced by actual Ukrainian proRussians---suspect they will be the ones to negotiate the proRussian demands if it ever comes to an inter Ukrainian negotiation

[Maeda Toshiie]

This is why the Ukraine did not trust the "aid" convoy which were Russian military trucks repainted white and driven by those "little men in tan".

Amazing what fits into a commercial long hauler these days?

https://twitter.com/Dbnmjr/status/500370750218706944/photo/1

So Putin is intending cut his losses and pull the plug?

The Ukrainians can inspect any outgoing "cargo" the way they did with the incoming convoy.

[OUTLAW 09]

So Putin is intending cut his losses and pull the plug?

The Ukrainians can inspect any outgoing "cargo" the way they did with the incoming convoy.

IMO Putin is not cutting his losses---he is actually upping the efforts if the YouTube video is correct where the new leader of the Donetsk stated he is anticipating receiving 1200 new fighters that were trained the last four months in Moscow and he is awaiting 120 APs and 30 tanks---the fighting on the UA side has slowed down and they have noticed an improved fighting abilities of the separatists.

By shifting out those that were not toeing the line makes it now easier to have a unified front.

Notice he is not de-escalating.

Putin totally miscalculated the western reactions from the beginning--he assumed they would fold as they did in the Georgian war and go back to business as usual---instead he is hit with sanctions that are actually biting now harder and he is isolated thoroughly and might not be invited to the G20 which is a prestige loss.

Latest affect of the sanction---the largest Russian oil company is asking the Russian government for a 45B USD bailout since they had built a number of business deals built on short term USD loans which they now cannot get.

Putin has no exit plan and did not take the exits that were being offered by the west as he thought his mercenaries would be holding their own---now they are losing and he cannot afford to lose face---losing face is a defeat and he does not want to be considered a loser against the west.

[OUTLAW 09]

Russian SF sniper team---awaiting the geo tag on the photos.

https://twitter.com/lennutrajektoor/status/500691130078728192/photo/1

Video was taken of this Russian SF sniper team inside the Ukraine.


BREAKING: A #Russia|n special force unit (СРС - Special Radio Communication Service) was seen and filmed in #Ukraine, check @lennutrajektoor

The goal of GRU RUS SOF opers are establishing secure radio comm w GRU GS for relaying & receiving C3I.

Video link---video was from 12 August and on the road that the "aid" convoy was to go down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqOu_-nqhc

[OUTLAW 09]

18 Russian Buk missiles being moved towards Ukrainian border.

https://twitter.com/djp3tros/status/500715471961088000/photo/1

[BrentWilliams]

IMO Putin is not cutting his losses---he is actually upping the efforts if the YouTube video is correct where the new leader of the Donetsk stated he is anticipating receiving 1200 new fighters that were trained the last four months in Moscow and he is awaiting 120 APs and 30 tanks---the fighting on the UA side has slowed down and they have noticed an improved fighting abilities of the separatists.

By shifting out those that were not toeing the line makes it now easier to have a unified front.

Notice he is not de-escalating.

Putin totally miscalculated the western reactions from the beginning--he assumed they would fold as they did in the Georgian war and go back to business as usual---instead he is hit with sanctions that are actually biting now harder and he is isolated thoroughly and might not be invited to the G20 which is a prestige loss.

Latest affect of the sanction---the largest Russian oil company is asking the Russian government for a 45B USD bailout since they had built a number of business deals built on short term USD loans which they now cannot get.

Putin has no exit plan and did not take the exits that were being offered by the west as he thought his mercenaries would be holding their own---now they are losing and he cannot afford to lose face---losing face is a defeat and he does not want to be considered a loser against the west.

I agree. He is upping the support significantly . However, at this point it appears Ukraine is still making progress. It was just reported they control the police station in Luhansk.

[OUTLAW 09]

I agree. He is upping the support significantly . However, at this point it appears Ukraine is still making progress. It was just reported they control the police station in Luhansk.

BW---noticed about a hour ago via Interfax press release Moscow is denying that they provided 1200 Russian trained mercenaries for the fight as well as 120 APCs and 30 tanks.

Total embarrassment for Moscow when they were to be meeting in Berlin---and after months of stating no we are not providing support.

Putin was directly challenged by Merkel in a call to him to finally come clean and admit he is supporting them and then to finally stop it.

Seems like the swap out of the separatist leader in the Donetsk did not get his messaging correctly stated and or agreed to with Moscow.

[OUTLAW 09]

Russian SF sniper team---awaiting the geo tag on the photos.

https://twitter.com/lennutrajektoor/status/500691130078728192/photo/1

Video was taken of this Russian SF sniper team inside the Ukraine.


BREAKING: A #Russia|n special force unit (СРС - Special Radio Communication Service) was seen and filmed in #Ukraine, check @lennutrajektoor

The goal of GRU RUS SOF opers are establishing secure radio comm w GRU GS for relaying & receiving C3I.

Video link---video was from 12 August and on the road that the "aid" convoy was to go down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqOu_-nqhc

Appears that these Russian SF photos were part of a larger upload over the last few days concerning the UA's bold attack on Krasnyi Luch which while successful came with loses. Interesting is that the Russian released a sitmap indicating the fight but only depicting the UA was surrounded in KL almost at the same time as the photos and videos were being posted.

Appears that the Russians launched a Russian SF strike across the border to cut off the UA advance thus the series of uploads---photos and videos.

What is interesting is the GRU/SF (load bearing equipment, radios, sniper weapons (2) and the use of the BTR 82s has primary weapons carrier) equipment, the use of the BTR-82 A1s and the use of the white arm and leg bands was used exactly like the Russian SF used them in the Crimea---meaning unmarked uniformed military running around in the Crimea with white arm bands.

This type of information coupled with the SBU's capture of a GRU/SF lightweight secure sitcom system hurts as it is usually something one does not want known as it goes to TTPs and methods.

Again poor Russian social media opsec by one of their so called elite units.

Second confirmed Russian military cross over into the Ukraine combined with their own produced sitmap which depicted the encirclement.

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl/

[OUTLAW 09]

There has been some blogging around the possibility of a Russian Chechen BN that is SF.

Here is another work up of the uploaded videos and photos with more OSINT analysis work and the attempt to geo tag and point to in fact a Russian Chechen SF BN.

http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-180-the-battle-for-lugansk-begins/#3839

[OUTLAW 09]

This is an interesting journalist report on her encounter with a road block manned by young proRussian fighters.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/sobbing-rebels-left-in-chaos/story

[OUTLAW 09]

In the face of countless videos/photos/journalist reports/voice intercepts/NATO statements and arrests by the SBU of countless Russian fighters it still seems Ruyssia cannot for some strange reason jump over the razor and openly admit that yes they have been supplying weapons/fighters/ammunition to the separatists.

JAL shot down arguments version 3.

Guess this is the Russian answer to Merkel demanding Putin Russia finally admit their support to the separatists.

Notice they still in their press releases push the civilian disaster crisis.

From RIA today:

MOSCOW, August 17 (RIA Novosti) -Russia is not sending any military equipment to Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"We have repeatedly said that no equipment is supplied there," Peskov said in an interview with the Govorit Moskva radio station.

Earlier, Donetsk Prime Minister Alexander Zakharchenko reported that militia had received some 150 combat vehicles, including 30 tanks, but did not specify where the equipment had come from.

Moscow has repeatedly rejected accusations of interfering in the situation in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that before accusing Russia, it is necessary to present real evidence of Moscow’s alleged interference in the Ukrainian crisis.

Numerous reports by Kiev have not received any confirmation so far.

Since mid-April, Kiev has been conducting a military operation against the southeastern regions of Ukraine that had refused to recognize the legitimacy of the new government after February coup.

Since the start of the operation, nearly 1,400 people have been killed and more than 4,000 wounded in the region, including about 2,600 civilians and 29 children, according to a report by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). At least 117,000 people have been forcibly displaced.

NOTE: Russian sources ie Interfax/RIA/RT have claimed in fact over 500K refugees so it is interesting they now accept UN numbers.

Russia has repeatedly condemned Kiev’s actions and urged for peaceful dialogue with representatives of Ukraine’s southeastern regions.

[Rods]

My take on the current situation and the removal of all of the mercenaries and the associated leaders by the 18th August is that Putin has had enough of failure by 'loose cannons' and he is about to up the ante by using a more professional leadership and much more direct chain of command with regular 'plausibly deniable' troops and if this does not stop the ATO and roll back the ATO gains, than as a last resort he will invade to achieve his objectives.

These I think are the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts as a minimum and may also include the Kharkiv and Kherson Oblasts as well, the former so he has a complete Eastern buffer and the latter so he has a direct route to Crimea, which is currently reliant on Ukrainian food and water supplies across the border. I can't see the objectives being more than this with the reported 45,000 troops on the Ukrainian border as to secure and hold the whole country he would need many more.

Like Afghanistan, I think winning and holding against a mainly hostile population will be a whole different ball game, when the famous Ukrainian Partisans come to the fore again.

To me this is the most dangerous current conflict strategically as once he has sorted Ukraine, he will then attempt to finish NATOs credibility and split the Western alliance and build a bridge to Kaliningrad through the Baltic countries. Where Putin is trying to rebuild an empire to prolong his time in power from a position of weakness, this will involve taking risks with unintended consequences like MH17, which makes him a particularly dangerous dictator.

[OUTLAW 09]

My take on the current situation and the removal of all of the mercenaries and the associated leaders by the 18th August is that Putin has had enough of failure by 'loose cannons' and he is about to up the ante by using a more professional leadership and much more direct chain of command with regular 'plausibly deniable' troops and if this does not stop the ATO and roll back the ATO gains, than as a last resort he will invade to achieve his objectives.

These I think are the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts as a minimum and may also include the Kharkiv and Kherson Oblasts as well, the former so he has a complete Eastern buffer and the latter so he has a direct route to Crimea, which is currently reliant on Ukrainian food and water supplies across the border. I can't see the objectives being more than this with the reported 45,000 troops on the Ukrainian border as to secure and hold the whole country he would need many more.

Like Afghanistan, I think winning and holding against a mainly hostile population will be a whole different ball game, when the famous Ukrainian Partisans come to the fore again.

To me this is the most dangerous current conflict strategically as once he has sorted Ukraine, he will then attempt to finish NATOs credibility and split the Western alliance and build a bridge to Kaliningrad through the Baltic countries. Where Putin is trying to rebuild an empire to prolong his time in power from a position of weakness, this will involve taking risks with unintended consequences like MH17, which makes him a particularly dangerous dictator.

An interesting take for a number of reasons:

1. Western leaders have individually attempted move than 14 times in private conversations with Putin and the last being Merkel who bluntly told him to confess up as the evidence is clearly there that he is supporting the separatists with weapons/money and fighters.

All ignored especially Merkels' attempt yesterday and now responded to by the Russian news agency RIA by the speaker for Putin---notice not responded to by Putin himself.

2. The use since 12 August of Russian GRU/SF units in attempting to free encircled separatists and the sending of an armored convoy into the Ukraine this week.

3. The ever increasing Russian ground and massively modern AD units literally up to the Ukrainian border.

4. The lack of a policy speech Putin was to give in the Crimea that was hyped before he left Moscow but was not given Crimea which surprised some.

5. Putin cannot afford a loss and his popularity numbers have actually plateaued and have not been increasing.

6. The costs to Russia in supporting the Crimea with food and water supplies is being totally overlooked by the West--they are actually costly and Russia does not have the financial abilities they promised the people in the Crimea.

7. The propaganda war has been massively increased in the last five days and the numbers supporting direct assistance to the Russians living in the eastern Ukraine are now climbing and we all know Putin "listens" to the numbers.

NATO's response today against any future "little green men" introduced into NATO countries especially the Baltics and Poland has been publicly announced.

[Rods]

Hi,

I agree with all of the points you have raised above.

I've just been reading the Reuters press release on the NATO response to 'little green men', which is good where they will consider it an article 5 scenario.

I'm convinced that the economy is taking second place with Putin where he can play 'we are all in this together card' when it comes to hardship, which is why he has made the food ban a pre-emptive strike. He will also hope that this will split the current united EU sanctions front and it looks like he maybe succeeding with this to a degree.

Taking over the East of the country is somewhat of a poisoned chalice, where he would gain oil and gas, some of the critical military equipment suppliers to Russia and a very inefficient outdated industrial sector which requires either major investment (unlikely) or continued subsidies.

To me the west's weakness in their response to Ukraine has been in 4 areas:

1. Not calling it what it is, a war conducted by Russia against Ukraine. What is is not: A popular uprising, a separatist movement or a civil war, where this is what Russia want people to believe.

2. The timid response by the western world's press by playing at even handed reporting role on mainly Russia's terms.

3. The West trying to avoid applying any sanctions as it is a more difficult political route than doing nothing. The EU have been the worst for this and the Canadians the quickest and most robust (but this might be due to the 3m Ukrainians that live in Canada?).

4. Not supplying lethal aid to Ukraine, where they have an army, prepared to fight a proxy war against an aggressor nation that is in the West's strategic interest for them to win.

I think the only way that Putin and Russia are going to be contained long term is through regime change and the best way for this is through sanctions and for Western Europe finding and implementing alternative sources of energy, where Russia is an unreliable supplier with considerable political baggage. The economy is his Achilles heel, with food shortages in 1917 and 1989-91 both causing regime change and Putin has a tacit agreement with the electorate to have a free hand as long as standards of living rise every year. This is one of the reasons he has recently committed to doubling Moscow Government Officials wages between now and 2018.

[OUTLAW 09]

More Russian tanks moving towards uncontrolled Ukrainian Izvarino border crossing point.

http://en.inforesist.org/media-a-convoy-of-100-russian-tanks-moves-towards-izvarino-in-ukraine/

[mirhond]

direct route to Crimea, which is currently reliant on Ukrainian food and water supplies across the border.


Bulls#!t.
1. Nothern Crimean Canal (which brought Dnieper waters to Crimea)has been closed in April.

http://www.unian.net/politics/911983-shlyuzyi-severo-kryimkogo-kanala-perekryityi-kanal-uspel-vyisohnut.html#ad-image-0

http://www.golos.com.ua/Article.aspx?id=329304

to be honest, I don't know whether it's open or still closed now.

2. Ukrainian food is already partially forbidden in Crimea, according to Ukrainian media.

http://economics.unian.net/agro/949818-v-okkupirovannom-kryimu-narastaet-ugroza-prodovolstvennogo-kollapsa.html



Not calling it what it is, a war conducted by Russia against Ukraine. What is is not: A popular uprising, a separatist movement or a civil war, where this is what Russia want people to believe.

Another load of BS. You don't even bothered to spend half an hour to investigate separatists political agenda and beliefs.

[BrentWilliams]

In the face of countless videos/photos/journalist reports/voice intercepts/NATO statements and arrests by the SBU of countless Russian fighters it still seems Ruyssia cannot for some strange reason jump over the razor and openly admit that yes they have been supplying weapons/fighters/ammunition to the separatists.

JAL shot down arguments version 3.

Guess this is the Russian answer to Merkel demanding Putin Russia finally admit their support to the separatists.

Notice they still in their press releases push the civilian disaster crisis.

From RIA today:

MOSCOW, August 17 (RIA Novosti) -Russia is not sending any military equipment to Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"We have repeatedly said that no equipment is supplied there," Peskov said in an interview with the Govorit Moskva radio station.

Earlier, Donetsk Prime Minister Alexander Zakharchenko reported that militia had received some 150 combat vehicles, including 30 tanks, but did not specify where the equipment had come from.

Moscow has repeatedly rejected accusations of interfering in the situation in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that before accusing Russia, it is necessary to present real evidence of Moscow’s alleged interference in the Ukrainian crisis.

Numerous reports by Kiev have not received any confirmation so far.

Since mid-April, Kiev has been conducting a military operation against the southeastern regions of Ukraine that had refused to recognize the legitimacy of the new government after February coup.

Since the start of the operation, nearly 1,400 people have been killed and more than 4,000 wounded in the region, including about 2,600 civilians and 29 children, according to a report by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). At least 117,000 people have been forcibly displaced.

NOTE: Russian sources ie Interfax/RIA/RT have claimed in fact over 500K refugees so it is interesting they now accept UN numbers.

Russia has repeatedly condemned Kiev’s actions and urged for peaceful dialogue with representatives of Ukraine’s southeastern regions.

At some point, why not just act decisively and invade? I think long term, that is a disaster for Russia. But this is also a disaster for Russia. The only difference is in one disaster is you get to have some part of eastern Ukraine.

[OUTLAW 09]

Bulls#!t.
1. Nothern Crimean Canal (which brought Dnieper waters to Crimea)has been closed in April.

http://www.unian.net/politics/911983-shlyuzyi-severo-kryimkogo-kanala-perekryityi-kanal-uspel-vyisohnut.html#ad-image-0

http://www.golos.com.ua/Article.aspx?id=329304

to be honest, I don't know whether it's open or still closed now.

2. Ukrainian food is already partially forbidden in Crimea, according to Ukrainian media.

http://economics.unian.net/agro/949818-v-okkupirovannom-kryimu-narastaet-ugroza-prodovolstvennogo-kollapsa.html



Another load of BS. You don't even bothered to spend half an hour to investigate separatists political agenda and beliefs.

an you mirhond have never in your comments here at SWJ answered a single question placed to you have you comrade mirhond.

let's see you first stated you would provide your ID

then you changed your English a total of five different times and at one point the English was really poor and you changed your logo three times

then you supported the looting of the airliner dead under the guise and in your own words "zealous Christian" beliefs and approved of their throwing 36 dead bodies into a truck and then you claimed they were being taken to Donetsk which they never did arrive and finally you approved the looting of those bodies

your are by the way now the sixth mirhond

then you admitted that you were in Russia with your food comments but again side stepped the questions placed to you

then you state we here should understand the separatist political agenda which is the "New Russia" as proclaimed by Putin--and comrade mirhond you have never provided a single example of discrimination of ethnic Russians residing in eastern Ukraine when I provided a list of six things that disproved discrimination of ethnic Russians

then yesterday a leading Donetsk separatist complained that "when they got a weapon in their hands then they had "power" forgetting whatever the political agenda was to be--now they are a criminal drunken band of thieves attempting to flee dressed as orthodox priests or civilians so I am not sure what they agenda was? t

there are reports now they show up for check point duty in civilian clothes now so they can flee if they are attacked---wow great fighters you have there mirhond

then now all the three "Russian" top leaders of the "New Russia" have fled "New Russia"

then we get reports of a Russian military convoy entering and being attacked by the UA artillery and then Russia denies again

then now we have the current Donetsk leader claiming in a open video he has received 1200 Moscow trained fighters, 120 APCs and 30 tanks---which was denied by the Russian Foreign Ministry

so comrade mirhond just what that "Separatist political agenda again"---I am not sure you even know what the "agenda" is or was?

[Chris jM]

Outlaw, for what it is worth Mirhond is providing a fascinating insight into a (the?) info campaign that Moscow would want us to believe. If I were you I would stop spending so much effort breaking down and attacking in detail everything said gentleman(s) states as it is pretty clear that his responses are going to continue regardless, and the general readership here can be trusted to make up an informed judgement overall.

One question I have which I have struggled to find an answer for is how large Russia's SF and SOF community is - I'm assuming that their SF have been involved, which seems to be safe judgement. Would Ukraine represent complete commitment and culmination for them, or would they be retaining some economies of scale and have some scope to expand their efforts at UW if opportunities became available, either in Ukraine or elsewhere in the FSU?

[mirhond]

it is pretty clear that his responses are going to continue regardless, and the general readership here can be trusted to make up an informed judgement overall.

Well of cause I continue to criticise (Ukro)media nonsence and bull$#!t poured here by some users (excuding Outlaw), I kinda feel obliged to bring some sanity, common sence and at least relevant links here
like this, for example

Donetzk after shelling
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGWgUZ7UvuM&index=35&list=UUVPYbobPRzz0SjinWekjUBw

and bull#### like this:

empty shells of Crimean stores, via Ukrainian site espreso.tv
link: http://espreso.tv/news/2014/08/02/na_polycyakh_krymskykh_supermarketiv_znovu_porozhn o

picture: http://espreso.tv/uploads/article/49165/images/im578x383-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%BD%D1%96%20%D0%B F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%96.jpg

reality:

Blizzard Nemo slams into US, via discovery.com
link: http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/preparing-for-nemo-blizzard-130208.htm

picture: http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/preparing-for-nemo-blizzard-3-660x433-130208.jpg

ps. all stuff is provided by Ukrainian journalist Anatoliy Shariy https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVPYbobPRzz0SjinWekjUBw

another funny, although rather old BS

http://inforesist.org/boj-v-marinke-tank-protiv-btr/


Но тут из посадки вылетает украинский БТР.
Он начинает ездить вокруг танка и лупить ему в башню из крупного калибра. Танк начинает буксовать, пытается навести башню на БТР, но скорости и маневренности не хватает. Потом танк пытается уйти, а БТР продолжает с близкого расстояния лупить ему в башню пока не раздается взрыв и башню не отрывает. Хлопцы в БТР оказались бойцами 72-й бригады. Вот такие вот у нас асы появляются!»

"Ukrainian BTR is making cirсles around tank, shooting at him with a mashinegun, tank tries to rotate its turret but BTR is faster, then tank tries to escape, BTR sprays its turret ring and finally tank expodes."
W-O-O-W!! T-72 lost all HPs and destroyed by 12.7 mm mashinegun!! Brilliant victory! I believe author of this epic plays World of Tanks too much.

[OUTLAW 09]

Well of cause I continue to criticise (Ukro)media nonsence and bull$#!t poured here by some users (excuding Outlaw), I kinda feel obliged to bring some sanity, common sence and at least relevant links here
like this, for example

Donetzk after shelling
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGWgUZ7UvuM&index=35&list=UUVPYbobPRzz0SjinWekjUBw

and bull#### like this:

empty shells of Crimean stores, via Ukrainian site espreso.tv
link: http://espreso.tv/news/2014/08/02/na_polycyakh_krymskykh_supermarketiv_znovu_porozhn o

picture: http://espreso.tv/uploads/article/49165/images/im578x383-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%BD%D1%96%20%D0%B F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%96.jpg

reality:

Blizzard Nemo slams into US, via discovery.com
link: http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/preparing-for-nemo-blizzard-130208.htm

picture: http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/preparing-for-nemo-blizzard-3-660x433-130208.jpg

ps. all stuff is provided by Ukrainian journalist Anatoliy Shariy https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVPYbobPRzz0SjinWekjUBw

another funny, although rather old BS

http://inforesist.org/boj-v-marinke-tank-protiv-btr/



"Ukrainian BTR is making cirсles around tank, shooting at him with a mashinegun, tank tries to rotate its turret but BTR is faster, then tank tries to escape, BTR sprays its turret ring and finally tank expodes."
W-O-O-W!! T-72 lost all HPs and destroyed by 12.7 mm mashinegun!! Brilliant victory! I believe author of this epic plays World of Tanks too much.

mirhond--you are getting to mellow for us.

1. was it not Russia who promised to support, provide and ensure the Crimeans were treated "better" than the Ukrainians "treated" them---but gasoline is in extremely short supply, electrical power comes and goes and water is being rationed, Russian does not have a budget yet for the Crimea but they talk about 2020 having one, the Russian tourists have not come even with Russian subsidies, the cost of living has rocketed a 67% sine Russia "annexed" the Crimea. and the Crimea cannot export products because of the sanctions.

so again mirhond what exactly was it that Russia promised the ethnic Russians in the Crimea for their votes?

nice that you quoted inforesist---shows that yes even a Russian mercenary driven tank can be out driven by a Ukrainian who simply drove in circles---maybe Russia should rethink tank doctrine after this video.

2. by the way inforesist was the source for Russian military service documents being released for the West to see that yes Russian soldiers are in fact fighting in the Ukraine

3. by the way since you posted a link for the shelling of Donetsk how about the reported shelling of a refugee column with GRADS fired by Russian mercenaries.

http://en.inforesist.org/militants-shelled-from-grad-a-column-of-refugees/

mirhond--reference the shelling of a civilian refugee column by Russian mercenaries is what a "friendly act" of support offered by the Russian government?

Many killed", "people burned alive in the vehicles" - BBC on the refugee convoy that came under fire near RU border. http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/rolling_news/2014/08/140818_rn_refugees_ukraine.shtml …

[mirhond]

SBU busted rebel group created by Russian SF

link: http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=128857&cat_id=39574

picture:
http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/img/publishing/?id=128863

Rebels are so desperate that they degraded to empty bottles (mm.., Chernihivske "White" beer, cheap and tasty, I like it :) ) and firework cases as means of destruction

gawd, thas stream of crap seems to be endless:eek:

to be honest, bottle might be turned into Molotov and firework case into IED, so one may give some credit to this "news"

[OUTLAW 09]

SBU busted rebel group created by Russian SF

link: http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=128857&cat_id=39574

picture:
http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/img/publishing/?id=128863

Rebels are so desperate that they degraded to empty bottles and firework cases as means of destruction

gawd, thas stream of crap seems to be endless:eek:

see mirhond--yu have got to be careful about posting;

about two weeks ago you posted photos which you allegedly stated were rockets being fired by the UA at civilains building--in those photos I indiated to you there were from three different missile sizes.

One photo did catch my attention---it was a 220mm MRL which can only be fired from a BM27 which the UA does not have in that area where you stated they were fired from. One photos depicted the fins and the other photos the actual MRL.

Now it appears the Russian mercenaries do have the BM27s which were reported a number of times having been seen crossing from Russia into the Ukraine.

then you posted that the UA was using WP against civilian targets---as well as did the RIA and Interfax which turned out to be photos from Gaza---but the use of cluster bombs is what "legal" and by the way Russia signed the international accord against the use f cluster munitions right mirhond?

http://en.inforesist.org/militants-used-hurricanes-with-cluster-munitions-against-the-ato-forces-photo/

[OUTLAW 09]

mirhond----seems the Donetsk separatist commander has a problem with his troops---"looting and being bandits within the ranks"

now mirhond what exactly was the separatists "political agenda" again that you complained we did not get---seems Russian mercenaries do not get it either if they have the time to "loot" and be "bandits"? no wonder the UA is beating them since it appears they are not looting and being bandits.

DONETSK, August 18 (RIA Novosti) – The death penalty was introduced in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) for the gravest crimes, the republic’s press center reported.

The first meeting of the Presidium of the DPR Council of Ministers was held on August 17. During this meeting, the Regulation on Military Courts and the Criminal Code of the DPR were approved.

The regulatory framework of the Russian Federation was taken as a basis of the Criminal Code of the republic, according to the press center.

"A legislative act provides for the death penalty for the gravest crimes," the republic’s statement said.

It is also noted that the system of military courts is to have two tiers. The lower tier includes courts-martial, which deal with crimes committed by military personnel of rank no higher than squadron commander. The top tier includes military tribunals that deal with offenses made by battalion commanders and those of higher rank. The DPR leadership believes that such a provision "would greatly facilitate the fight against looting and banditry" among its servicemen.

As DPR Foreign Minister Alexander Karaman said, once the war is over, the DPR will step "on the path of humanization of the criminal law."

[OUTLAW 09]

The Interpreter is carrying photos of a Russian supply convoy coming back out of the Ukraine 20 URALs and 4 KAMAZs at the same border crossing point where the aid tucks are currently parked.

Photos have not been geo tagged.

http://www.interpretermag.com/

While the Kremlin keeps denying it, Western intelligence agencies, Russian and Western journalists, The Interpreter and Russian separatists all agree that Russia is sending armored vehicles, trucks, troops and supply trucks across the border into Ukraine to support the separatists. What's interesting today is the claim that supply trucks, possible having already delivered their cargo to the Russian troops already in Ukraine or their separatist allies, have been spotted returning back across the border at the Izvarino checkpoint, the same place where the aid convoy is supposed to cross the border, and the same place where Russian armor was spotted last week rolling into Ukraine.

[OUTLAW 09]

Russia continues mil supplies (heavy towed artillery) to its proxies in Luhansk using route via Sukodilsk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPlew6Ee118 …

This Russian towed artillery unit had been filmed the previous evening by a Polish TVN24 camera team close to the white convoy next to the Russian separatist crossing point where the aid trucks are parked.

Seems that while all are watching the aid convoy--- Russian heavy military equipment, supplies ,and troops are crossing over during the night time--cannot believe this is not being see by NATO/US AWCS and E3s?.

http://www.tvn24.pl/wiadomosci-ze-swiata,2/artyleria-wozy-opancerzone-i-bron-przeciwlotnicza-ruchy-rosjan-przed-kamera-tvn24,460025.html

Now journalists are seeing the same game---Russian tanks are moving up close to the crossing point just as the artillery unit did and probably will cross over to be seen the next day near Luhansk.

https://twitter.com/BojanowskiW/status/501377393316364290





[OUTLAW 09]

Outlaw, for what it is worth Mirhond is providing a fascinating insight into a (the?) info campaign that Moscow would want us to believe. If I were you I would stop spending so much effort breaking down and attacking in detail everything said gentleman(s) states as it is pretty clear that his responses are going to continue regardless, and the general readership here can be trusted to make up an informed judgement overall.

One question I have which I have struggled to find an answer for is how large Russia's SF and SOF community is - I'm assuming that their SF have been involved, which seems to be safe judgement. Would Ukraine represent complete commitment and culmination for them, or would they be retaining some economies of scale and have some scope to expand their efforts at UW if opportunities became available, either in Ukraine or elsewhere in the FSU?

Although with each response he reveals more and more of the how they argue and the newest emphasis messaging---thus the constant pushing. Meaning if one pushes back does he respond or move on or if responds what is the response and the change of direction to avoid the push back--since the shoot down he is struggling actually to regain his footing as has their entire info war efforts.

It took a massive amount of push back to just get him to admit he was in Russia as he sidestepped that all the time.

The Russians have greatly expanded their SF abilities and have even complimented SOCOM by creating their own SOCOM and it falls to a degree under the GRU which also has recon/sabotage groups.

I linked the last day or so to a number of videos and photos depicting their SF/GRU equipment and their secure satcom radios taken from inside the Ukraine.

There was an interesting article today in Foreign Policy about the Russian UW efforts. If you look at their new military doctrine "New Generation Warfare" and their eight step approach to supporting political warfare they have reached step six with the introduction of actual Russian troops into the Ukraine.who some commenters here said would not be done.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/08/16/russia_sanctions_ukraine_arms_nato

First six steps of their new UW doctrine---it is this doctrine that NATO announced today they will view as a trigger for Article 5 for NATO members.

The phases of new-generation war can be schematized as (Tchekinov & Bogdanov,
2013, pp. 15-22):
First Phase: non-military asymmetric warfare (encompassing information, moral, psychological,
ideological, diplomatic, and economic measures as part of a plan to establish a favorable
political, economic, and military setup).
Second Phase: special operations to mislead political and military leaders by coordinated
measures carried out by diplomatic channels, media, and top government and military agencies
by leaking false data, orders, directives, and instructions.
Third Phase: intimidation, deceiving, and bribing government and military officers, with the
objective of making them abandon their service duties.
Fourth Phase: destabilizing propaganda to increase discontent among the population,
boosted by the arrival of Russian bands of militants, escalating subversion.
Fifth Phase: establishment of no-fly zones over the country to be attacked, imposition of
blockades, and extensive use of private military companies in close cooperation with armed
opposition units.
Sixth Phase: commencement of military action, immediately preceded by large-scale reconnaissance
and subversive missions. All types, forms, methods, and forces, including special
operations forces, space, radio, radio engineering, electronic, diplomatic, and secret service
intelligence, and industrial espionage.

[kaur]

XX committee has translated last SBU tape.


The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has released a new signals intelligence (SIGINT) intercept on its YouTube page (link here; see a follow-up report in the Kyiv daily Ukrayinska Pravda here) that it says demonstrates that Russian-backed separatists in the Donetsk area are targeting civilians. As Andriy Lysenko, spokesman for the Ukrainian National Security Council, explained today, the conversation provides evidence that the “terrorists” tried to lay blame for a shelling incident at Stepove on 15 August on Ukrainian forces, with the help of the Russian media.

The SBU intercept is a conversation between “Vovk” (Wolf), the deputy chief of state security for the “Donetsk People’s Republic” and “Korsa,” a female forward artillery observer for a unit of “Grad” 122mm multiple rocket launchers, the weapons that caused civilian casualties at Stepove.

http://20committee.com/2014/08/18/russian-backed-separatists-discuss-killing-civilians/

[OUTLAW 09]

XX committee has translated last SBU tape.



http://20committee.com/2014/08/18/russian-backed-separatists-discuss-killing-civilians/

kaur---great link---there have been countless false flag attacks against both the UA and civilians over the last two months and it seems often that even the western media tends to ignore it even when bloggers catch the open source evidence and geo tag it.

[OUTLAW 09]

XX committee has translated last SBU tape.



http://20committee.com/2014/08/18/russian-backed-separatists-discuss-killing-civilians/

kaur--here is what puzzles me---the lack of a response by the entire west--actually JMA has been right all along.

In the face of verifiable open source information which you know both NATO and the US "sees" every day with the AWCSs and the E3s not a single voice from any EU nor US political leader has been raised that in fact there is a major armed conflict going on inside the Ukraine being fought with both Russian soldiers and irregulars and Russian heavy weapons.


After the downing of MH17 and now the shelling of civilians by Russian supplied BM21s with a verifiable voice intercept with the firing unit what was the response from the west---zip, nichts, nothing, nada.

And you cannot tell me the West did not see that happen via the AWCSs---if we can see the movement of Taliban in rugged mountains via GMTI we can certainly see a BM21 moving on level ground.

So it begs the question ---why no response by the west---was it not the west that argued if he goes in and it is verified then the sanctions will get harder---when a threat is issued and nothing follows it up then the western bluff was called.

That does not bode in the long term good for the Baltics even if Breedlove issued new NATO Article 5 guidelines---if NATO is not willing to move now then they will now move against an irregular "local force" in the future.

Putin has gone all in and is supplying arms, troops and heavy weapons.

There has been even open source comments and photos showing the burials of Russian airborne troops back in Russia who died during a "training accident"---what more does the west need?

https://twitter.com/lennutrajektoor/status/501623474419695616

It is almost like the US political leadership cannot address more than one international relations problem at a time--yes we bomb and hellfire the IS and get back onto the GWOT treadmill---but when US interests and especially the interests of the EU and NATO are far more deeply challenged then what is the US response---well let's see maybe we can negotiate or better Putin will come to his senses, or maybe if we ignore it will simply disappear like a bad dream.

That is the problem with soft power when one's bluff is called as Putin has just done the last week---what then do you have as a "soft power response"---not much would be the answer.

Soft power if backed up by a brutal sanctions regime if a certain line is crossed carries far more weight than say hard military power does but the US seems reluctant to use it and the EU most certainly will not use it.

[OUTLAW 09]

Seems that others in fact see the Russian troop and weapons movements as a Russian invasion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-gardels/strobe-talbott-russia-ukraine_b_5688516.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000014

Some here often pointed out the west did not know what the Russian demands were or that NATO had somehow violated an agreement that never existed outside of a personal one on one- one time event in the early 90s

Seems to me Putin has never come off his own declared doctrine of I can defend/invade countries if my fellow ethnic Russians are somehow discriminated against and his new political warfare using the strategy of UW.

Seems to me that even in the face of sanctions which are hurting his economy massively right now he still has not come off of those two stated demands---so how was again were negotiations to stop him?

And again I will point out---absolutely no responses from the west on the invasion efforts by Putin and his irregular/regular forces.

It is almost like everyone is watching the "aid convoy" and not noticing at night the massive movement of troops and heavy equipment across the same border area.

[kaur]

Outlaw, it seems that West is moving in it's own tempo. Western institutions just can't react to every new episode of warfare. EU has moved from mild indiviual persons and 10th rate firms to 3. phase sanctions. NATO is making new defence plans. Who could think about those in March? Russia has been much more quicker in OODA loop due to hesitation and threat perception in Western camp and structural logic of West's institutions. The longer Russia's hand is visible in Ukraine, the more hesitation and threat perception are fading in the West.

[Firn]

I was pretty sceptical about false flag artillery strikes attacking civilians by (Pro)Russians for Russian TV some weeks ago but more and more different sources are supporting those claims. The Ukrainian artillery has certainly killed civilians with artillery but with the Russian propaganda in overdrive it has a big demand for a constant feed of ever more gruesome stories and pictures. In addition artillery attacks on Russian territory might have to be fabricated as the Ukrainians have been weary to retaliate there.

[OUTLAW 09]

A convoy of military equipment from Russia has gone through the village of Mykolaivka-Stanichno in the Luhansk region, according to Informator, Espreso.TV reports.

“A caravan” with tanks, MLRS “Grad”, artillery and even field kitchens stretched for 1.5 kilometres. The convoy of technical equipment drove through the villages Pioneerske and Mykolaivka in the direction of Luhansk.

Subsequently, the convoy was spotted in the vicinity of the Epicenter hypermarket in the eastern neighbourhood. According to eyewitnesses, the military men talked with locals reluctantly, but nevertheless admitted that they are from Russia. The Russian green men” passed drove through Budennoho vul. [street] towards the city center.

Note: Through the border areas controlled by terrorists of the [so-called] Luhansk Peoples’ Republic (LNR) and the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) into Ukraine regularly pass convoys of Russian military equipment. The convoys are made up of soldiers of the Armed Forces of Russia.

[Shchors]

I have to pour cold water on the latest Ukrainian military reports again. But since the Ukrainian government feeds overly optimistic reports, better to get the bad news sooner than later. The Ukrainian offensives on multiple fronts, that appeared to be gaining success only a week ago, have for all intents and purposes, ground to a halt. There are two reasons: first, the open border (following the epic breakout by the three Ukrainian brigades dug in there for over a month) has allowed the Russians to infiltrate up to 5,000 infantry, 250 tanks and 50 rocket missile systems into the fight. (Even the separatists admit that they now have up to 20,000 infantry in total, compared to 48,000 Ukrainians, by their count) These have been parceled out to reinforce a multitude of threatened sectors, to include Makeevka, Snizhne, Krasnyi Luch, Antratsyt, Illovaysk and Faschivka. Therefore, the advancing Ukrainians have encountered stiffened resistance and increased artillery fire, followed by counterattacks supported by tanks. (While reports of disheartened separatists deserting are true, these are being replaced more and more by fresh "little green men" from Russia) Two, the multiple Ukrainian maneuvers were carried out by small formations to interdict lines of communications, usually by combat groups of no more than two battalions in size with some armor and mobile artillery attached. While many of these thrusts were able to achieve rather deep incursions and achieved initial surprise, the battle groups were too small to sustain themselves if surrounded. Not surprisingly, the Russians used some of their reinforcements to surround these Ukrainian forces. Thankfully, most of these were able to break out of encirclement, but with significant loss of life and destroyed or abandoned heavy equipment. For example, just yesterday, only some 700 members of the 30th mechanized brigade broke out of encirclement near Stepanivka (east of Saur-Mohyla) Close to 200 were killed or captured (primarily by artillery from across the Russian border). Three days ago, the separatists circulated video of some thirty bombed out or abandoned armored vehicles in Stepanivka.

Moreover, reports of Luhansk being close to capture are way off the mark. While it is true that Ukrainian troops are fighting in the northeast and southeast sectors of the city (a few Ukrainian spetsnaz even broke through to the city center), these are only four battalions. There are many more separatists inside of the city. Furthermore, the Ukrainians themselves are close to being surrounded. "Little green men" just infiltrated through a narrow gap in the line and are now inside of the city (By some reports as many 1200 Russian paratroopers and 100 tanks slipped in last night) The 80th (lvivska) airmobile brigade, reinforced by some tanks from the 1st guards tank brigade and the famous "Aidar" battalion, together with the 3d spetsnaz have been attacking into the city as well as holding Russian tanks at bay coming up the road from the border at Krasnodon for over a week. Sad to say, their heroic fighting may have to end in surrender. Their only base of supply is the Luhansk airport, which itself is surrounded and the nearest friendly lines are over 20 kilometers away. Also, the airport's defenses were thinned out when these troops attacked from inside the airport in an easterly direction to interdict the road to Luhansk from use by Putin's "white humanitarian" column. In summary, there are now too many Russians, too few battle worthy Ukrainians, with which to seize Luhansk and/or Donetsk. Ukrainian president Poroshenko will have to bite the bullet and withdraw into a firm line of defense further north, or else up to one-third of the Ukrainian army in the Donbas will be destroyed or captured by the ever-increasing number of Russian troops. The Ukrainians are over-extended, battle-weary and under-supplied, while the Russians are concentrated in a central position, coiled to strike in whichever direction they choose and sporting state-of-the-art equipment (No T-90 tanks yet, but rest assured, they will mark their debut soon). The war has reached the stage where the Ukrainian army is starting to fight proper and cohesive units of the Russian army, mostly spetsnaz, supported by armor and artillery, instead of militia that was led by spetsnaz.

[OUTLAW 09]

I took the time to go back and reread the Latvian study done on the Crimea event viewed against that new UW doctrine and if one takes the time you will see that Russia is now at the sixth phase of that doctrine and moving to phase seven on a eight phase scale.

If this new doctrine succeeds as it looks like it will the entire Baltic, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovenia are at risk, NATO and the EU will be split and the US isolated inside Europe---all long time goals from Putin since his take over.

It is critical that commenters on this thread thoroughly understand the new Russian UW doctrine as it is being carried daily and in full public view complete now with videos.

While this article below focuses on the Crimea as analyzed by the National Defence Academy of Latvia
Center for Security and Strategic Research it applies directly to the current events in eastern Ukraine that
we comment daily on. It also explains why the West seems incapable of responding.

We tend to forget that the new Russian military doctrine currently being used in eastern Ukraine in support to the
Russian political warfare being directed towards the Ukraine is in fact based totally on Unconventional Warfare.

A major goal of the current Russian politics is the splitting of the EU from the US influence and the splitting/weakening of NATO as a valid force on it’s borders---a sort of permanent war as mentioned below.

Taken from:
RUSSIA’S NEW GENERATION WARFARE IN UKRAINE:
IMPLICATIONS FOR LATVIAN DEFENSE POLICY

Taken from page three:
Russia’s Campaign in Ukraine as New-Generation Warfare

Russia's military strategy can be divided into three interrelated levels. First, doctrinal
unilateralism, or the idea that the successful use of force results in legitimacy. The weak reaction
of the United States and the European Union has indicated that the strategy is correct.
Second, by strongly adhering to legalism. Without discussing the legal merit of Russian actions,
they were all backed by some form of legal act. Putin asked the Russian parliament for
authorization to use military power in the Ukraine if necessary. Naturally, it was granted.
Russia uses this fact together with the argument that it never used military power in Crimea
as a sign of its peaceful intentions. Third, Russia denies the idea of it having militarily occupied
Crimea, since the troops there were local self-defense forces.


Taken from page five:

The result was a clear military victory on the battlefield (meaning the Crimea) by the operationalization of a well-orchestrated campaign of strategic communication, using clear political, psychological, and information strategies (Ripley & Jones, 2014), the fully operationalization of what Russian military thinkers call “New Generation Warfare”. As a result, it follows that the main guidelines for developing Russian military capabilities by 2020 are:

Adapted from Peter Mattsson’s DSPC lecture in Riga “The Russian Armed Forces Adapted to New Operational
Concepts in a Multipolar World?”, February 19, 2014.

x. From war in a defined period of time to a state of permanent war as the natural condition in
national life.

Thus, the Russian view of modern warfare is based on the idea that the main battlespace is the mind and, as a result, new-generation wars are to be dominated by information and psychological warfare, in order to achieve superiority in troops and weapons control, morally and psychologically depressing the enemy’s armed forces personnel and civil population.


The main objective is to reduce the necessity for deploying hard military power to the minimum necessary, making the opponent’s military and civil population support the attacker to the detriment of their own government and country. It is interesting to note the notion of permanent war, since it denotes a permanent enemy. In the current geopolitical structure, the clear enemy is Western civilization, its values, culture, political system, and ideology.

In other words, the Russians have placed the idea of influence at the very center of their operational planning and used all possible levers to achieve this: skillful internal communications; deception operations; psychological operations and well-constructed external communications. Crucially, they have demonstrated an innate understanding of the three key target audiences and their probably behavior: the Russian speaking majority in Crimea; the Ukrainian government; the international community, specifically NATO and the EU. Armed with this information they knew what to do, when and what the outcomes were likely to be,
demonstrating that the ancient Soviet art of reflexive control is alive and well in the Kremlin.

Reflexive control can be defined as “(...) a means of conveying to a partner or an opponent specially
prepared information to incline him to voluntarily make the predetermined decision desired by the initiator of
the action” (Thomas, 2004). For a comprehensive analysis of the Russian and Chinese achievements in
this area, see Tatham, 2013.

This is very relevant to understanding its strategic significance, since it is the operationalization
of a new form of warfare that cannot be characterized as a military campaign in
the classic sense of the term. The invisible military occupation cannot be considered an occupation
by definition. Not only were the troops already on Crimean territory stationed at Russian
naval bases, but they were also “officially” part of the autochthone civilian militia. The
deception operations occurred inside Russian territory as military exercises, including ones in
Kaliningrad to increase the insecurity of the Baltic States and Poland. At the same time, the
Crimean parliament officially - although not legally by the Ukrainian constitution - asked to
join the Russian Federation, and the Ukrainian media became inaccessible. As a result, Russian
channels of communication propagating the Kremlin’s version of facts were able to establish
a parallel material reality, legitimizing the Russian actions in the realm of ideas.

Russia has been aggressively pursuing a mix of the strategies characteristic to the first
phase of new-generation warfare, including the one of non-military asymmetric warfare in
Latvia.

NOTE: This is a major reason for the new NATO definition of Article Five issued by the
US Commander Breedlove, and why Merkel is headed to Latvia this weekend.

Some examples include the broadcasting of Russian propaganda channels, issuing
Russian citizenship to Latvia’s non-citizens, pseudo human-rights movements, pro-Russian
political parties, just to cite the most blatant. Since Russia’s strategy is opportunistic, reflecting
the notion discussed before, that any campaign is to be pursued only in the case of certain
victory, it will not initiate the second, third, and fourth phase unless favorable conditions are
clear. The establishment of such favorable conditions is very much the responsibility of Latvia
itself. Many will correctly claim that this is obvious. But, is it? If so, why is so difficult for us
to take measures to counteract Russia’s measures towards establishing the favorable conditions
that can lead to the next phase? As the popular saying goes, “it’s no use crying over spilt
milk.”

The phases of new-generation war can be schematized as (Tchekinov & Bogdanov,
2013, pp. 15-22):
First Phase: non-military asymmetric warfare (encompassing information, moral, psychological,
ideological, diplomatic, and economic measures as part of a plan to establish a favorable
political, economic, and military setup).
NOTE: this is why the Russian global information war has been massive and all encompassing
to include SWJ.
Second Phase: special operations to mislead political and military leaders by coordinated
measures carried out by diplomatic channels, media, and top government and military agencies
by leaking false data, orders, directives, and instructions.
Third Phase: intimidation, deceiving, and bribing government and military officers, with the
objective of making them abandon their service duties.
Fourth Phase: destabilizing propaganda to increase discontent among the population,
boosted by the arrival of Russian bands of militants, escalating subversion.
Fifth Phase: establishment of no-fly zones over the country to be attacked, imposition of
blockades, and extensive use of private military companies in close cooperation with armed
opposition units.
NOTE: The extensive/massive buildup of Russian SAM11s, 13s, and 17s on the Ukrainian border
are all about a no fly zone.
Sixth Phase: commencement of military action, immediately preceded by large-scale reconnaissance
and subversive missions. All types, forms, methods, and forces, including special
operations forces, space, radio, radio engineering, electronic, diplomatic, and secret service
intelligence, and industrial espionage.

NOTE: IMO we are already seeing Russian implementation of this phase over the last week in
eastern Ukraine using the “humanitarian aid convoy” as a true Trojan Horse camouflaging action.

Meaning see we the Russians as so concerned about the welfare of the ethnic Russians we are
providing 2000 tons of supplies---but not over the previously agreed to crossing point and not certainly not in
initial agreement with the ICRC and the Ukraine which is what I did state to the world before I sent the trucks on their way.

Now as the world looks daily at the convoy- Russian heavy weapons and troops are driven
over the border in a steady stream with the resulting videos being posted and no one
in the West seems to care.

It often appears that the IS is far more important to the US than the loss of NATO and the EU would be to US long term strategies.

That is if a strategy even exists?

[OUTLAW 09]

Ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl is carrying a series on photos and interviews concerning the civilians hit by alleged irregular MRLs.

There are well a number of bloggers indicating a Russian troop column of 1200 and 150 armored vehicles had made it into the Luhansk city.

Must be the "aid" that the Donetsk said was coming? But the difference is -not irregular troops but trained Russian airborne troops and major MBTs.

[Dayuhan]

If this new doctrine succeeds as it looks like it will the entire Baltic, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovenia are at risk, NATO and the EU will be split and the US isolated inside Europe---all long time goals from Putin since his take over.

How would you define "success" for this doctrine in the current context? What do you think the Russians are accomplishing or are likely to accomplish in the Ukraine, and how would that produce the results you predict?

Is there any evidence to suggest that the recently reported entry of troops and weapons has affected the momentum of the fighting? Current reports suggest that the Ukrainians are still

[mirhond]

has allowed the Russians to infiltrate up to 5,000 infantry, 250 tanks and 50 rocket missile systems into the fight. (Even the separatists admit that they now have up to 20,000 infantry in total, compared to 48,000 Ukrainians, by their count)
(While reports of disheartened separatists deserting are true, these are being replaced more and more by fresh "little green men" from Russia) Two, the multiple Ukrainian maneuvers were carried out by small formations to interdict lines of communications, usually by combat groups of no more than two battalions in size with some armor and mobile artillery attached.
Moreover, reports of Luhansk being close to capture are way off the mark. While it is true that Ukrainian troops are fighting in the northeast and southeast sectors of the city (a few Ukrainian spetsnaz even broke through to the city center), these are only four battalions. There are many more separatists inside of the city. Furthermore, the Ukrainians themselves are close to being surrounded. "Little green men" just infiltrated through a narrow gap in the line and are now inside of the city (By some reports as many 1200 Russian paratroopers and 100 tanks slipped in last night)

No links, not even a single picture, no evidences - just another erotic dream from Ukromedia, as usual.

[mirhond]

An interview with a commander of "Aidar" batallian, petty criminal Ruslan Abal'mas turned into vigilante, about Snezhnoe (town just in between Lugansk and Donetzk)

http://obozrevatel.com/interview/85209-komandiryi-batalona-shahtersk-95-militsii-nuzhno-uvolit--eto-vragi.htm


Мы считаем, лучше потерять Снежное как город, чем потерять своих солдат. Нужно авиацией, артиллерией проработать город так, чтобы его снести, чтоб земля выгорела метров на 5.

Мы дали людям один раз коридор, второй раз – они не хотят оттуда уходить. Нам их жалко, но если люди не хотят оттуда уходить, значит, они остаются на стороне террористов. Как можно сохранить город, если он полностью заражен чумой!?

We think it's better to scorch entire town to the ground than loose a soldier.
We gave escape rout to people once or twice - the didn't leave.. if they don't want to escape - it means they are on the separatists side. How can a town be spared if if completely infected with plague?

This town is full of heresy! Prepare for exterminatus!
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQLExKJbzydSObt9K4NR3r97THf90AO CUhFztPoaX7m9pFWFsz
http://www.blacklibrary.com/Images/Product/AlternativeBL/xlarge/angel-exterminatus-art-01.jpg

[kaur]

Putin personally comments mirhond's last post.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wHgnJy7ECb8

This is nice video to confirm Putin's words by Crimean Tatar's TV reporter, how BTR's with Russian flags were behing cossacks and women in Crimea. This is how Ukrainian unit was harassed by civilians and backed by Russian troops. Worth to watch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aSLaM0xB64s

[mirhond]

Putin personally comments mirhond's last post.


Wow! Putin watches my activity here and for some misterious reasons makes irrelevant comments? For what I deserved such an honor? :D
Anyway, I fail to see your point - how on Earth his threats connected to Ukrainian punisher dreaming of exterminatus?



This is nice video to confirm Putin's words by Crimean Tatar's TV reporter, how BTR's with Russian flags were behing cossacks and women in Crimea. This is how Ukrainian unit was harassed by civilians and backed by Russian troops. Worth to watch.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aSLaM0xB64s

LOLWUT? What makes you think that cameraman is "Tatar TV reporter"? He actually calls himself member of self-defence. 5:53

[OUTLAW 09]

Wow! Putin watches my activity here and for some misterious reasons makes irrelevant comments? For what I deserved such an honor? :D
Anyway, I fail to see your point - how on Earth his threats connected to Ukrainian punisher dreaming of exterminatus?




LOLWUT? What makes you think that cameraman is "Tatar TV reporter"? He actually calls himself member of self-defence. 5:53

comrade mirhond---you really think anyone pays any more attention to your comments/cartoons (besides they take up computer power)---for every one provide us three more opposite comments can be found alone coming out of Russia itself

[OUTLAW 09]

let's see you comment on this mirhond---four days ago a convoy of T90s were photo geo tagged driving out of Rostiv headed towards the Ukrainian border.

then yesterday they were photoed again near Rostov coming back from the Ukrainian border---this time empty---by the way the same license plates.

then this shows up today from bloggers:


Survivor of the 30th brigade @ #Stepanovka tells they were attacked w 21 #Russian army T-90 tanks on August 12. http://www.berdichev.biz/content/view/12100/1/ …

this is the third report---will be more than happy to provide you the links
of T90s inside the Ukraine and do not argue the Ukrainians had them "stolen or sold them"

the last time I checked the Ukrainians have no T90s.

[OUTLAW 09]

There has been a series of blogging reports of torture committed by the Russian mercenaries/irregulars/Russian troops over the last week on Ukrainian prisoners and their killings after the torture---complete with photos taken from Russian social media as evidence.

Yesterday there surfaced on Russian social media a video (w/English subtitles) depicting alleged Ukrainian torture of proRussian fighters.

what is interesting is the potential fact that the mistreated proRussians are actually captured Ukrainian personnel

There is a really good biometric study done on one particular individual and a few others in the video which then came to the conclusion---a lanched Russian misinformation video to underline the Russian claim of the impending civilian humanitarian disaster ongoing in eastern Ukraine--but instead of tortured proRussians they are actually Ukrainian POWs.

mirhond care to make a comment---always welcome to join in this particular comment

ukraineatwar.blogspot.nl

[OUTLAW 09]

No links, not even a single picture, no evidences - just another erotic dream from Ukromedia, as usual.

let us see now a link that you claim does not exist comrade mirhond: you guys just cannot figure out how to use the social media to it best abilities--regardless of how much you spend bloggers win in the end my friend---and you all have lost the open source war before it even started

comrade mirhond----maybe this ia Russian soldier who "just got lost" and though he was going to Siberia and ended up in eastern Ukraine?

#Russian private N.Surnachev of Pskov 76thDiv, his name on captured IFV’s machine-gun #Lugansk http://vk.com/id71665467 pic.twitter.com/5s5M8RkiOH

so comrade mirhond---and again;

APC BMD-2 of RF army, Pskov airborne brigade captured near Lutuhyne pic.twitter.com/LdBL3in9OM via @Dbnmjr http://liveuamap.com/e/2014/20-of-august-apc-bmd2-of-rf-army-pskov-airborne-brigade-captured …

[OUTLAW 09]

comrade mirhond you have got to get those eastern Europeans under control--or maybe Putin will use this as a new reason for a Russian invasion of all of eastern Europe.

He must now not only "defend" those poorly mistreated and discriminated pro Russians he must "defend" all those Soviet war memorials out there.

you did know that their protection was part of the 4 plus 2 treaties with Germany right?

let us see---first Poland, then Slovenia, then Hungary, and now Bulgaria---where will this end mirhond?

Russia demands Bulgarians stop painting Soviet monuments as Super heroes pic.twitter.com/OtuoD4ovUM via @Gary__Bass http://liveuamap.com/e/2014/20-of-august-russia-demands-bulgarians-stop-painting-soviet-monuments …

[OUTLAW 09]

so comrade mirhond--about those Russians that are not suppose to be in the Ukraine?

got an answer for this?

Ukrainian journalist Bochkala: Ukrainian forces captured active duty Russian paratroopers whose unit entered #Ukraine

https://twitter.com/StateOfUkraine/status/502353032055898113/photo/1

[OUTLAW 09]

so comrade mirhond--about those Russians that are not suppose to be in the Ukraine?

got an answer for this?

Ukrainian journalist Bochkala: Ukrainian forces captured active duty Russian paratroopers whose unit entered #Ukraine

https://twitter.com/StateOfUkraine/status/502353032055898113/photo/1

mirhond---further information on Russian airborne soldiers captured with their two APCs.

and there are no Russian soldiers fighting in the Ukraine?

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/ukraine-gets-new-evidence-of-russian-soldiers-fighting-on-its-turf-photos-361543.html

[OUTLAW 09]

http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-185-russian-airborne-forces-reportedly-captured-in-ukraine/

Battalion Dnepr-1 breaks #Ilovaisk siege w/ BMP, #pickup_truck and some Ural, passing destr. tanks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG4WY-nTNFU&index=1 …

[OUTLAW 09]

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-as-ukraine-forces-gain-in-east-focus-of-german-diplomacy-shifts-2014-8?IR=T&

This is in fact the true opinion of Germany and the US--Canada has a totally different take.

[mirhond]

Ukrainian mortar crew is trying to shoot. More fun starts at 6:10 :D

http://www.twow.ru/forum/index.php?showtopic=7677&st=1965

[OUTLAW 09]

A good article in understanding the Russian proxy war that is up to the sixth phase now of their new UW military doctrine "New Generation Warfare" which is supporting the Russian political warfare against the Ukraine.

http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/understanding-russias-proxy-war-in-eastern-ukraine-361643.html

[OUTLAW 09]

mirhond--you need to get better information source--ask the Cossacks if this is true since you supported their "zealous Christian burial rituals--whatever that meant"?

Hundreds of corpses were brought back to #Chechnya over the last month, Chechen sources says

http://obozrevatel.com/abroad/24571-za-mesyats-v-chechnyu-iz-ukrainyi-privezli-bolee-sotni-trupov-kadyirovtsev-kavkazskie-smi.htm

[OUTLAW 09]

This goes to the heart of why it is virtually impossible right now to negotiate with anyone in Moscow as some have supported here.

1. the "aid" convly left Moscow with a large fanfare display all the while Russia "claimed" to have "negotiated" the shipments with the ICRC,and the Ukraine and travelled under the ICRC flag which was not allowed by the ICRC

Both the ICRC and the Ukraine stated there had been no agreement worked out and knew nothing about the shipments.

2. Then they drive to the Ukrainian border yesterday and again Russian "claims" to have reached agreements again with both the ICRC and the Ukraine.

Agreement was 1) under ICRC flags, a ICRC member in each truck and3) agreements from all sides that there will be no fighting along the route

Then late yesterday Moscow started stating more aggressively "there will be serious consequences if the convoy is stopped!".

Now the day this comes across---the convoy simply leaves the border crossing unchecked by the Ukrainians, without the agreed to ICRC member per truck, no return route worked out and on and on.

NOW what is interesting is that every single truck driver is carrying the old style Russian passports from at least 5-7 years ago when the rest of Russian new style passports have been issued the newer ones starting five years ago so are the drivers military using cover passports without their real names?

#Russia's aid convoy is pushing into the war zone without clearance from #Ukraine or the blessing of the Red Cross

http://bbc.in/VKcBsP


So again why is it imperative to negotiate with Russian when they cannot even hold to a ICRC/Ukrainian agreement?

Some bloggers/journalists have been saying with the fighting going badly for the mercenaries Russia has been desperately trying to get the convoy into the Ukraine---knowing full well it will be attacked by "someone" thus delivering the excuse to cross over with their peacekeeping force that is sitting virtually on the border in launch position just waiting for an excuse.

There is the urgent need to get a large number of "peacekeepers" in ---in order to at least state they need to separate the fighting forces and we all have the experiences of Moldavia and Georgia when Russian "peacekeepers arrive" ---they never leave.

Some commenters here need to fully understand what drives Putin---if he is going to negotiate this Tuesday he needs it to be from a position of strength not weakness.

Again this from the BBC article--explains exactly the intent of the convoy from the very beginning and some still want to negotiate with Russia and as I have stated over what?

Notice the link up with the mercenaries as armed guards, the ICRC in fact stating it is not an approved ICRC convy and the IMPLIED and stated direct THREAT by Russia against the Ukraine.

This is playing out exactly as the Ukrainians told the West it would play out.

Russia's foreign ministry said Ukraine had held up the convoy in order to pursue war against rebels in Luhansk, where the aid is destined.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said it was "not part of that convoy in any way".

Reports suggest the lorries are being escorted by rebel fighters.

"Our humanitarian aid convoy is starting to move towards Luhansk," the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement (in Russian).

It warned Ukraine not to take any action against the convoy without specifying the consequences.

[OUTLAW 09]

This goes to the heart of why it is virtually impossible right now to negotiate with anyone in Moscow as some have supported here.

1. the "aid" convly left Moscow with a large fanfare display all the while Russia "claimed" to have "negotiated" the shipments with the ICRC,and the Ukraine and travelled under the ICRC flag which was not allowed by the ICRC

Both the ICRC and the Ukraine stated there had been no agreement worked out and knew nothing about the shipments.

2. Then they drive to the Ukrainian border yesterday and again Russian "claims" to have reached agreements again with both the ICRC and the Ukraine.

Agreement was 1) under ICRC flags, a ICRC member in each truck and3) agreements from all sides that there will be no fighting along the route

Then late yesterday Moscow started stating more aggressively "there will be serious consequences if the convoy is stopped!".

Now the day this comes across---the convoy simply leaves the border crossing unchecked by the Ukrainians, without the agreed to ICRC member per truck, no return route worked out and on and on.

NOW what is interesting is that every single truck driver is carrying the old style Russian passports from at least 5-7 years ago when the rest of Russian new style passports have been issued the newer ones starting five years ago so are the drivers military using cover passports without their real names?

#Russia's aid convoy is pushing into the war zone without clearance from #Ukraine or the blessing of the Red Cross

http://bbc.in/VKcBsP


So again why is it imperative to negotiate with Russian when they cannot even hold to a ICRC/Ukrainian agreement?

Some bloggers/journalists have been saying with the fighting going badly for the mercenaries Russia has been desperately trying to get the convoy into the Ukraine---knowing full well it will be attacked by "someone" thus delivering the excuse to cross over with their peacekeeping force that is sitting virtually on the border in launch position just waiting for an excuse.

There is the urgent need to get a large number of "peacekeepers" in ---in order to at least state they need to separate the fighting forces and we all have the experiences of Moldavia and Georgia when Russian "peacekeepers arrive" ---they never leave.

Some commenters here need to fully understand what drives Putin---if he is going to negotiate this Tuesday he needs it to be from a position of strength not weakness.

Again this from the BBC article--explains exactly the intent of the convoy from the very beginning and some still want to negotiate with Russia and as I have stated over what?

Notice the link up with the mercenaries as armed guards, the ICRC in fact stating it is not an approved ICRC convy and the IMPLIED and stated direct THREAT by Russia against the Ukraine.

This is playing out exactly as the Ukrainians told the West it would play out.

Russia's foreign ministry said Ukraine had held up the convoy in order to pursue war against rebels in Luhansk, where the aid is destined.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said it was "not part of that convoy in any way".

Reports suggest the lorries are being escorted by rebel fighters.

"Our humanitarian aid convoy is starting to move towards Luhansk," the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement (in Russian).

It warned Ukraine not to take any action against the convoy without specifying the consequences.

Shortly after the unauthorized Russian truck crossing this has been reported:


Ukraine Reporter @StateOfUkraine

Unconfirmed reports of explosions and that Russian convoy has stopped inside #Ukraine

Further reports from the crossing point indicate Russian military pushed the Ukrainian border guards to the side and allowed the trucks to move on through---the ICRC has stated the convoy is not a "recognized ICRC aid convoy now".


Myroslava Petsa @myroslavapetsa

#Tymchuk writes Russian servicemen pushed Ukrainian border guards aside in Izvaryne so that 34 trucks could enter Ukraine without ICRC

[OUTLAW 09]

Russia warns Ukraine not to move against humanitarian convoy crossing border @KyivPost

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russia-warns-ukraine-not-to-move-against-humanitarian-convoy-which-moved-across-the-border-without-clearance-361648.html … pic.twitter.com/4M5tCxRS5H

This ITAR-TASS press release states "they were permitted to cross"---but denied by both the ICRC and the Ukrainian border security guards.

http://en.itar-tass.com/world/746211

[OUTLAW 09]

Russian TV RF recycles 2013 Kazakhztan explosion to fake Ukrainian missile attack in Donbas.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/08/21/russian-tv-channel-rf-used-2013-footage-of-kazakhstan-rocket-explosion-to-show-non-existent-ukrainian-missile-attack-in-donbas/ … pic.twitter.com

[OUTLAW 09]

Major announcement from the Ukraine---will be interesting to see response of or the lack of a US/EU/NATO response.


Ukraine Reporter @StateOfUkraine

#Ukraine has just declared that the eastern part of the country has now been officially/openly invaded by #Russia

And the news just keeps on rolling---while the US was so intent on bombing the IS they simply "forgot" Putin---and that is called a strategy?

BREAKING Per #Ukraine MFA official announcement #Russian army forces seized Ukraine BGCP that made custom inspection. http://mfa.gov.ua/ua/press-center/comments/2211-zajava-mzs-ukrajini-u-zvjazku-z-nezakonnim-peretinom-konvojem-rosijsykoji-federaciji-derzhavnogo-kordonu-ukrajini

Ukraine calls Russia's movement of trucks across the border a 'direct invasion': http://yhoo.it/1tyd7FS pic.twitter.com/xymsx4c9qp

#BREAKINGFOOTAGE THE MOMENT OF #RUSSIA OFFICIALLY STARTING THE INVASION OF #UKRAINE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7aoRuyqH0Q … pic.twitter.com/6jpRGCHAcS

#Ukraine security chief Nalivaichenko: "military personnel r driving the Russian trucks, which are military vehicles" http://www.unian.net/politics/954254-rossiya-sovershila-pryamoe-voennoe-vtorjenie-na-territoriyu-ukrainyi-sbu.html …

BREAKING #UKR MFA -The fact the convoy wasn't inspected nor is Red Cross aware of the content is sign of internvetion http://mfa.gov.ua/ua/press-center/comments/2211-zajava-mzs-ukrajini-u-zvjazku-z-nezakonnim-peretinom-konvojem-rosijsykoji-federaciji-derzhavnogo-kordonu-ukrajini …

Responsibility for convoy safety lies with #Russia,terrorists shelling possible route,provocations not excluded - MFA http://mfa.gov.ua/ua/press-center/comments/2211-zajava-mzs-ukrajini-u-zvjazku-z-nezakonnim-peretinom-konvojem-rosijsykoji-federaciji-derzhavnogo-kordonu-ukrajini#lang-select …

[OUTLAW 09]

Let's see where things stand;

1. Ukrainians have both killed and captured Russian airborne personnel, IFV, and documents from the 76th AB Div.
2. Russian T90 tanks were involved in a major fight inside the Ukraine and only the Russian Army has T90 tanks.
3. NATO has confirmed Russian artillery together with their crews firing inside the Ukraine at Ukrainian troops.
4. The Ukrainian SBU has killed and captured a number of Russian SF/GRU recon teams inside the Ukraine.
5. Russia openly violated any agreement they made on the "aid" convoy and what Obama bluntly told them last week.
6. The leader of the DNR stated last week n a public interview Russia trained 1200 fighters and has supplied them with 120 APCs and 20 tanks.

If one reads the international definition of what constitutes a declaration of war and what constitutes what an invasion is defined as----Just what now is the US strategy outside of talking and threatening more sanctions?

It seems the US is more interested in bombing the IS and not focusing on central Europe as are the Germans who want to ship anti tank weapons to the Kurds for use against ---what kind of IS armored vehicles do they currently have in their inventory vs say the Ukrainian Army that is seeing countless Russian APCs, T64, T72s and now T90s and they are killing UA personnel.

Does this make sense to anyone?

I know we discuss the need for strategies here---but can anyone describe for me the current Russian strategy?

[OUTLAW 09]

8 Russian Paratroopers of the 76th Division from Pskov in Critical Condition at Luhansk Hospital

http://en.censor.net.ua/n299191

And the day ends in Europe with this report coming from CBS today:

Charlie KayeVerified account
‏@CharlieKayeCBS BREAKING. Pentagon: "Russia must remove its vehicles from the territory of Ukraine immediately."

Let's see if the US WH and Obama have anything to say by say 0900 European time Saturday and if Merkel in fact now goes to the Ukraine as her position in this game has been weakened as the Ukrainians currently are not so sure of the German overall position with regards to Russia.

[OUTLAW 09]

Appears critique of the Russian move has hit home as this was released this evening by RIA for the reasons they raced the aid to the separatists.

An interesting statement to say the least and designed to blunt any coming EU/NATO/US sanctions and political moves.

Notice they keep using the term international humanitarian norms but not defines just what those intl laws are---again goes back to they massive need to have everything "legal".

MOSCOW, August 22 (RIA Novosti) – Russia insists that its decision to speed up humanitarian cargo delivery to eastern Ukraine without waiting for Kiev’s formal approval was morally right and fully in line with the international norms, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Friday.

“We act fully in line with norms of the international humanitarian law,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in a statement.

“We cannot and will not tolerate the plight of people living in protesting South-Eastern Ukraine,” the deputy foreign minister added.

“We are sure that we did the right thing. And we accuse Kiev and its backers of repeatedly putting their political interests, which are anti-Russian in essence, above the basic human values of kindness and compassion,” Ryabkov continued.

[OUTLAW 09]

This appears to be a new Russian reason for moving the aid convoy over the border without asking anyone.

Seems the Russian "story" is changing hourly.

From the Russian Ambassador to the UNSC:


The items which are perishable, says #Churkin - 'particularly the food for children'


#Churkin at #UNSC - 'some of the aid items are perishable so we told the #Ukraine authorities 'we cannot procrastinate any longer''

[OUTLAW 09]

8 Russian Paratroopers of the 76th Division from Pskov in Critical Condition at Luhansk Hospital

http://en.censor.net.ua/n299191

And the day ends in Europe with this report coming from CBS today:

Charlie KayeVerified account
‏@CharlieKayeCBS BREAKING. Pentagon: "Russia must remove its vehicles from the territory of Ukraine immediately."

Let's see if the US WH and Obama have anything to say by say 0900 European time Saturday and if Merkel in fact now goes to the Ukraine as her position in this game has been weakened as the Ukrainians currently are not so sure of the German overall position with regards to Russia.

Reference the Russian airborne WIAs:


Jerry @jerrym10000 · 6h

N Stanko, HromadskeTV: 8 #Russian paratroopers from Pskov in difficult condition in #Lugansk hospital +30 transported to hospital in #Rostov

[OUTLAW 09]

Rear Admiral Ihor Kabanenko: Three powerful groups of Russian troops have been identified

Posted on August 22, 2014 by chervonaruta


By Rear Admiral Ihor Kabanenko, Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine
08.22.2014
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine

Three powerful groups of Russian troops have been identified, who are in full combat readiness at our borders and in the Crimea: “North,” “Center” and “South.” The movement of troops demonstrates their preparation for something. This “something” may soon be:
1.The continuation of the “back and forth” near our borders with the aim of provocative and intimidating methods while at the same time of expanding the zones of instability with the use of Russian special forces (commandos).
2.Invasion under the guise of “peacekeeping operations” with the goal of mastering Dnipropetrovsk (main), Odessa and Kyiv occupations of the respective territories of Ukraine.

All this will be accompanied by an information-psychological operation aimed at our military and population.

[OUTLAW 09]

This appears to be a new Russian reason for moving the aid convoy over the border without asking anyone.

Seems the Russian "story" is changing hourly.

From the Russian Ambassador to the UNSC:


The items which are perishable, says #Churkin - 'particularly the food for children'


#Churkin at #UNSC - 'some of the aid items are perishable so we told the #Ukraine authorities 'we cannot procrastinate any longer''

Another Russian FM excuse for the aid trucks crossing without ICR/Ukrainian approval:


Daniel Sandford ✔ @BBCDanielS

Tonight at Ten: A Lukashevich of @mfa_russia tells me "Kiev has desperately attempted to derail the very important humanitarian operation."

[AmericanPride]

If one reads the international definition of what constitutes a declaration of war and what constitutes what an invasion is defined as----Just what now is the US strategy outside of talking and threatening more sanctions?

The U.S. doesn't have a strategy outside of sanctions. The traditional tool - military coercion - is ill advised in this situation.


It seems the US is more interested in bombing the IS and not focusing on central Europe as are the Germans who want to ship anti tank weapons to the Kurds for use against ---what kind of IS armored vehicles do they currently have in their inventory vs say the Ukrainian Army that is seeing countless Russian APCs, T64, T72s and now T90s and they are killing UA personnel.

Because bombing IS doesn't invite further escalation from a nuclear armed state that is also capable of spoiling U.S. interests in other parts of the globe. Ukraine is not the exclusive or primary interest of the U.S.


Does this make sense to anyone?

Yes - the Obama administration is not interested in escalating the conflict between the U.S. and Russia to include acts of violence between the two states. Russian acts of war in Ukraine is one thing - inviting military action between the U.S. and Russia is another. This is something I've repeatedly mentioned in this thread and others regarding escalating the conflict.

There are still no viable proposals made to coercivelly reverse Russian gains in Ukraine. Do you have any? The Kiev offensive is probably pretty close to triggering further Russian escalation - we've already seen steady escalation despite sanctions and condemnations. So I'm confident that we are pretty close to a negotiated settlement, with the next round of talks to take place in the coming days between the Russian and Ukrainian heads of state.