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

[OUTLAW 09]

There is a constant stream of blogging reports and independent journalist bloggers since the 25th of august when the first Russian troops went into the Ukraine of high losses of manpower and high wounded numbers.

Reports drifted out today of the Russian Rostov military hospital being completely overfilled with wounded and in St. Petersburg there is also no more available hospital beds for the Ukrainian wounded.

KIA estimates range form 700 just on 25 Aug to now a total nearly 2,000.

There are confirmed reports that the Russian military has given their Russian commanders in the Ukraine orders to find open plots of land for burial of Russian soldiers in the Ukraine so the bodies do not start showing up in Russia.

There are unproven reports of Russian military field crematoriums being sent into the Ukraine.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/09/0...ive-to-russia/

Even if the numbers are lower than the reported numbers--it is a remarkable high number for a rag tag regular Army working with independent BNs fighting with less armor and artillery and no aircraft.

[OUTLAW 09]

Russian mercenaries still have a hard time aiming and firing accuarately the BM21s they have---hit today a Donetsk coalmine and set it on fire.

The "October" mine in #Donetsk city is burning after being hit by "Russian terrorist Grad missiles".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whE1olE1RtM …

[OUTLAW 09]

Interesting US comment concerning the 1997 NATO Russian Founding Act.

Philip Karber, a former senior U.S. defense official who has provided assessments of Ukraine’s military to Congress, said, “Russia occupies and incorporates Crimea, shoots down civilian aircraft, then violently invades and is destroying Ukrainian army—and we are supposed to honor a non-treaty, 15-year-old commitment? If the U.S. is playing by those kind of rules we are in much bigger trouble than we admit and our allies are doomed.”

If it had been Putin he would have already violated/ignored it---if it stopped him from his stated end goal.

[OUTLAW 09]

This chart accurately depicts if one takes all Russian/Putin statements since before the Crimea and his latest New Russia statements as to what his end state is for south/eastern Ukraine.

(Pro-)#Russian territorial aspirations. Everything right of and under the red line.
pic.twitter.com/z8zI181GMd

https://twitter.com/HaraldDoornbos/s...982144/photo/1

[OUTLAW 09]

Social media analyst types are now branching out and searching Russian social media and finding some interesting information.

Here is a picture of a Russian military member on the left and he again in a Berkut Special Police uniform on the Maidan.

Begs the question just how involved were the Russian GRU and Russian military in countering physically the Maidan on Ukrainian soil?

I posted a link to a Russian Navy SEAL who had been in the Ukraine in Feb 2014.

If you wondered, who killed people on #Euromaidan: soldiers from #Russia in #Ukraine uniform!

https://twitter.com/lennutrajektoor/...72131424063488 … pic.twitter.com/KZK9ARCrd1

The Russian soldier in the picture was recently captured and sent back seriously wounded to Rostov by the Ukrainian Army thus his picture was used to match other social media inputs.

[OUTLAW 09]

Another indicator that the Ukrainian Army is shifting tactics---and going to guerrilla warfare concept--their SF have already moved into that mode.

#Ukrainian Army HQ plans to establish partisan movement. Partisan units commanders r already defined, NSC spox

http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2014/09/1/7036468/ … |EMPR

[AmericanPride]

Outlaw,

If Putin wanted to annex eastern Ukraine, he would have seized it when Russia seized Crimea. He would have accepted, not rejected, the Donetsk petition for annexation. And he certainly would not have financed a protracted and destructive conflict that will cost billions in reconstruction for a Russian economy that has many of its own problems already. Moscow does not want to annex eastern Ukraine - it wants to weaken Ukraine and obstruct its participation in Western economic, security, and political institutions in order to create space between Russia and NATO.

Despite all of your hysterical (and frequently contradictory) claims about the mad-hatters in the Kremlin with their "altered state of reality", the fact is that Moscow and Kiev, as predicted, are coming around to an initial agreement facilitated by European governments to de-escalate the conflict and create political space for the potential establishment of a final settlement on some serious political (and social and economic) questions regarding Ukraine.

The Ukraine government does not have the strength to sustain a protracted conflict, especially one that Moscow can unilaterally escalate. Rebuilding the political structures in the eastern regions will be difficult for Kiev already, on top of the economic reconstruction necessary, and the continued threat of Russian interference. How will Kiev manage the demobilization of the militants and incorporate them into the political process? How will Kiev finance reconstruction, and under what conditions will the West extend more loans for it? Can Russia be expected to offer loans for reconstruction and what will be the political price for that support? In the long term, Kiev is fighting a losing battle, the U.S. has no interest in direct conflict with Russia, and there is serious risk for the conflict's escalation to seriously damage the status quo in the rest of Europe. So - yes, an agreement will happen, and it will probably favor Russia more than Ukraine.

[Firn]

Despite all of your hysterical (and frequently contradictory) claims about the mad-hatters in the Kremlin with their "altered state of reality", the fact is that Moscow and Kiev, as predicted, are coming around to an initial agreement facilitated by European governments to de-escalate the conflict and create political space for the potential establishment of a final settlement on some serious political (and social and economic) questions regarding Ukraine.

I hope that such an agreement takes place quickly although I'm doubtful to say the least. So far Putin has often 'de-escalated' - and escalated in words only to push hard in a single direction when it came to facts. We will see.

In the long term, Kiev is fighting a losing battle, the U.S. has no interest in direct conflict with Russia, and there is serious risk for the conflict's escalation to seriously damage the status quo in the rest of Europe. So - yes, an agreement will happen, and it will probably favor Russia more than Ukraine.

My take is that Russia is fighting a losing battle in the long term if the EU and the USA are not too mild with their sanctions and not too weak with their (mostly economic) support. In fact Russia has already lost a huge deal, less then the target of it's aggression of course but far more then the Western world. War is generally a loss for the countries involved, for some more and for some less. Sanctions are quite similar as they disrupt free trade. Sadly in quite a few occasions letting an aggressor continue does offer still worse choices.

I'm pretty sure nobody knows exactly what will happen in the next days, weeks, months or years. Lots of wars were started with the illusion of a relatively quick and bloodless victory, just like this one as I suppose. In quite a few cases those became very costly for the invader, eroding the will of the population. Propaganda helps to support the political goals of the leadership, but it has limits as history has shown.

In the meantime the German government has given the go-ahead for 20.000 protective vests. Merkel had promised at a CDU meeting to take personally care of their delivery. I have of course no idea how quickly they will reach the Ukrainian troops...

[davidbfpo]

Yes finally Russain actions in the Ukraine have led to the amphibious ship order being delayed:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29052599

I just hope the near-completed ship is disabled and guarded - after all the Israelis spirited away a number of missile boats from a French dockyard years ago:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherbourg_Project

[AmericanPride]

hope that such an agreement takes place quickly although I'm doubtful to say the least. So far Putin has often 'de-escalated' - and escalated in words only to push hard in a single direction when it came to facts. We will see.

I agree - the Russians typically drive a hard bargain at the negotiating table. But I also think the window of opportunity is closing for both Moscow and Kiev. The offensive by the Ukrainian Army demonstrated the weakness of the insurgency and prompted Russia's committment to escalate. That can only be done so many times and sustained for so long before the political and economic consequences start to overtake the value of intervening in the first place.

Also - there's the question of what are Russia's intentions? If the goal is to weaken the political stability of Ukraine, this is essentially mission accomplished.

My take is that Russia is fighting a losing battle in the long term if the EU and the USA are not too mild with their sanctions and not too weak with their (mostly economic) support.

I think this is a complex question once we start expanding the scope of consideration beyond Ukraine-Russia relations. I don't think the sanctions are compelling the Russians to come to the table - I think it's their recognition that they've achieved a good portion of the goals, and a good deal now is better than holding out for a perfect deal later. There's a decreasing return on investment the longer the intervention continues. And the Russians aren't typically ones to fret too much about spilled milk and the loss of good will when it comes to preserving their perceived core interests. Ukraine is going to need alot of help in the near future and by necessity, Russia will probably play a role in that - and I think that's exactly what the Russians want.

The question I'm concerned about: what's in it for the U.S.? The U.S. can afford to be bellicose in its rhetoric: (1) it doesn't cost anything, (2) it signals to domestic and international audiences that the U.S. is serious, and (3) the U.S. does not have to live with the threat of a potential Russian invasion. Hence - the willingness of Kiev, Berlin, etc to talk with Moscow. But can the U.S. afford to undermine an agreement between Kiev and Moscow, even if that agreement appears to favor Russia?

[carl]

So - yes, an agreement will happen, and it will probably favor Russia more than Ukraine.

I don't think you've factored human emotion into the equation. A lot of people have died. That tends to get people's back up and then they aren't so amenable to neat and tidy considerations of what might upset the status quo.

[carl]

Another indicator that the Ukrainian Army is shifting tactics---and going to guerrilla warfare concept--their SF have already moved into that mode.

It seems from my mostly uniformed forever a civilian perspective, a definition of 'happy hunting ground' might include SF being let loose upon Russian supply columns manned by conscripts.

[AmericanPride]

I don't think you've factored human emotion into the equation. A lot of people have died. That tends to get people's back up and then they aren't so amenable to neat and tidy considerations of what might upset the status quo.

This is true - and it's going to be a major problem for the Kiev government. All of the fighting, deaths, and destruction of property has occurred in the east; regions already dissatisfied with the central government. Will the population blame the Russians or the government in Kiev for their circumstances? How will Kiev treat the political opposition and the demobilization of the armed militants? How will Kiev regulate the operations of pro-government militias and their treatment of the population?

[kaur]

Putin peace plan in Ukraine 2014.

1. the separatists (kaur - Russians) halt all offensive operations

2. Ukrainian troops move their artillery back out of range of cities and large towns in the rebel-held (kaur - Russian held) area

3. Ukraine to cease airstrikes

4. the establishment of an international monitoring mission and humanitarian aid corridors

5. “all for all” prisoner exchange

6. “rebuilding brigades” to repair damaged roads, bridges, power lines and other infrastructure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/wo...ssia.html?_r=0

Sarkozy-Medvedev plan in Georgia 2008.

1) Non-use of force.

2) Stop all military action.

3) Free access to humanitarian aid.

4) Georgian troops return to their previous positions before the conflict.

5) Russian troops return to the lines they held before the start of the military operation. Before an international solution is worked out Russian peacekeepers are taking up an additional security role.

6) The start of an international discussion over the future status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

http://www.ccun.org/News/2008/August...rgia%20War.htm

Authorities in South Ossetia say about two thousand people have died in the fighting. Their capital Tskhinvali lies in ruins. Russian emergency services say they are caring for hundreds of wounded in the area.

The Russian Government has promised some 40 million dollars to help re-build the city.

It is estimated that more than 30,000 Ossetians have fled the fighting to cross the border to Russia. Funerals are being held in North Ossetia for some of those who have died.

What is the difference between those two Russia's wars? Did they figure out that South Ossetia and Abhazia are too expensive projects and it would be more clever to share the rebuilding process expences with West? Hatred is seeded and strings are attatched?

[kaur]

Opinion: High price for ceasefire in eastern Ukraine

The Kremlin will have achieved its goals - for the time being - if there is a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine. But it wouldn’t mean the end of the conflict, writes DW’s Ingo Mannteufel.

- A new frozen conflict

- Poroshenko, a loser

- Another loser

http://www.dw.de/opinion-high-price-...en-eu-2092-rdf

To continue Georgia and Ukraine comparsion.

19.08.2008

“No business as usual”

The Council strongly urged Russia to “take immediate action to withdraw its troops from the area”.

As NATO Secretary General underlined during his press conference, “the NATO-Russia Council meetings would be placed on hold until Russia adhered to the ceasefire and the future of our relations will depend on the concrete actions Russia will take to abide by the … peace plan”. “We are not closing doors”, he said again, but “we…cannot continue with business as usual… as long as Russia does not commit to the principles upon which we agreed to base our relationship”.

http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2008...st/e0819a.html

31.10.2008

Kouchner’s Kommersant interview coincided with his talks in St. Petersburg with Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov. In those talks, Kouchner called for a quick start to EU-Russia negotiations on a partnership agreement, signaling a return to business-as-usual after Russia’s recent invasion of Georgia.

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_...1#.VAeDNWIaySM

At page 20, there is resume about European action after Georgia-Russia war. Good material to compare with today's situation in Ukraine. For example page 12 is like deja vu.

http://www.natolin.edu.pl/pdf/analiz...iza_1_2013.pdf

[AmericanPride]

What is the difference between those two Russia's wars? Did they figure out that South Ossetia and Abhazia are too expensive projects and it would be more clever to share the rebuilding process expences with West? Hatred is seeded and strings are attatched?

There isn't much difference - that's been pointed out by a number of people. I think it's pretty obvious the Russians want strings to be attached - the Maiden revolution meant all of their strings were cut, and the military operations were launched to bring Russian interests back to the table vis-a-vis Ukraine's political future. Rebuilding eastern Ukraine using Russian resources or funds means accepting Russian conditions for said aid - and that means continued Russian influence in determining Ukraine's economic and political future.

[Bill Moore]

I don't think you've factored human emotion into the equation. A lot of people have died. That tends to get people's back up and then they aren't so amenable to neat and tidy considerations of what might upset the status quo.

This isn't as true when states fight a so called regular war. These types of wars are mostly determined in the military domain, and once one side's military is defeated or realizes it can't win they can sue for peace. Most recent example for the U.S. was DESERT STORM. On the other hand, when it is a war amongst people, even if a state actor serves as a van guard that mobilizes the people and to some extent is directing the effort, it is very hard to bring this type of war to an acceptable end for both parties. They then to drag on for many years. Again, this is why I think we should be increasingly hesitant to employ UW as a course of action just because it is expedient. There are certainly times when it is the best course of action to pursue, but it seems that lately, O.K. since Ike was President, we opted for this form of warfare due to the perceived costs and political risks being low. Yet the moral and political costs are normally higher than we anticipated.

I can't see this approach working out well for either the Russians or Ukraine. I certainly don't see a better peace on the horizon. The Russians may have masterly used UW as an operational approach to achieve their objective, but I suspect they're questioning if it was the best way to achieve to their political object based on the second and third order effects. Only time will tell.

[OUTLAW 09]

http://www.dw.de/opinion-high-price-...en-eu-2092-rdf

To continue Georgia and Ukraine comparsion.

19.08.2008



http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2008...st/e0819a.html

31.10.2008



http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_...1#.VAeDNWIaySM

At page 20, there is resume about European action after Georgia-Russia war. Good material to compare with today's situation in Ukraine. For example page 12 is like deja vu.

http://www.natolin.edu.pl/pdf/analiz...iza_1_2013.pdf

kaur---I am not sure that the "Putin Plan" is anything other than a verbal way to influence the EU meetings this week as Putin knows sanctions are coming that will literally put the Russian economy over the cliff for the next 5-7 years and that is hard then to explain to the Russian population just "how important south/eastern Ukraine is for Russia" w2hen many in Russia are now questioning the Crimea annexation---meaning in the end what did it bring us the Russian population?

This popped up in RIA this morning and goes to the heart of why Putin "engaged" in the global media with his "offer".

http://en.ria.ru/politics/20140904/1...event-New.html

Right now the core hindrance is the demand by the mercenaries that they want to have a relationship with the EEC and the core demand from Russia is still on the table--no EU Association agreement and they have three reasons that they demand that even the EU cannot agree to.

So stalemate.

I am not so worried about about a "frozen state" similar to Georgia and Moldavia for the simply reason the industrial base in the Donbas needs business outlets and secondly with the Crimea annexation and the severe hit the Russian economy has taken Russia cannot provide any rebuilding efforts as they promised for say the Crimea which did not also show up as Russia is basically broke.

Here is the interesting point---all of the industrial base in the east is outdated and built around the Soviet state model of tons produced not quality and export chances---that will take the EU to help out but the EU will not spend funds on an "occupied frozen state" concept that Russia has pulled before. So any downsizing that is needed means unemployment and a flat lining of the local economies--- and that will hit the DPR in the face not Kiev since it is the DPR that is "governing".

There are now reports of "taxes" being forced on the local businesses by the mercenaries--that ain't going over well with many saying they will fold up and depart for Kiev rather than stay in the area.

Also if the area is "frozen" cannot see the Kiev central government doing a lot of money investments in a area that is basically under Russian control---why would they?

If the economy in the east/south remains unchanged and frozen then the so called ethnic Russians will start asking "was it worth it" as they have done in the liberated eastern towns and villages.

There is an entirely different scenario that has come forward--quietly from within the Kiev elites---slowly let the Donbas go---set then a definitive border between the DPR and the Ukraine---rebuild and modernize with EU assistance the western portion and let Russia be responsible for the south-east and failure as they are doing now in the Crimea simply because they cannot afford 10-15B USD per year to support both separatist areas plus the other three enclaves.

But Kiev cannot sell that idea right now just after the hard fighting and the Maidan---

They have Putin/Russia over a barrel right now in the IJC rulings first on Yukos and then coming in Stockholm where Russia is desperately trying to renegotiate a gas price in order to show Stockholm they are agreeable--Gazprom does not want an international ruling on it's gas contracts which are in fact monopolistic. On top of this they can via the IJC get massive rulings for all oil/gas lost revenues and royalties, lost investments/properties and for the lost military facilities/equipment in the 100s of billions which Russia must pay or face constant harassment via seizures of their ships, planes, oil and gas and losing their banking creditability if they do not pay.

Such a ruling would reinforce the coming EU Cartel ruling which will be also against Gazprom---you have seen the South Stream completely stopped by the EU.

Gazprom and Putin virtually hate the new EU Regulation 3 requirements---that there must be deregulated energy competition across the EU.

Gazprom and Putin want to have gas as a weapon the new EU requirements kill that idea totally.

[OUTLAW 09]

A perfect example of what I have been calling the Russian "altered state of reality".

Begs the question--what has the individual been smoking lately?

From RIA today:

MOSCOW, September 4 (RIA Novosti) - The concerns of Eastern European countries about their security and Russia’s alleged destabilization of the situation in Ukraine are baseless, as such an attitude has more to do with phobias then with real security concerns, Russia’s Permanent Representative to NATO Alexander Grushko said in an interview with Euronews.

“These worries are completely baseless. We have proven many times that all these so called facts produced by NATO and other European capitals are not really facts, but fabricated documents. We are not concentrating troops, neither movement of military hardware which could be considered as destabilizing,” Grushko said.

According to Grushko, these concerns can be attributed to phobias. “And phobias can not be treated with deploying tanks and additional combat forces, “ he noted, advising the countries to take a closer look at such problems prevalent in their own societies,

Again what planet is this individual currently residing on?

He definitely seems to have never read the Russian new military doctrine, nor seems to know the Russian military exercised a tactical nuclear strike on the Baltics and Poland, nor seems to have read the comments by a Russian military "expert" that the Baltics would become first targets if NATO placed bases in their countries and he definitely does not seem to know what the stated 2012 Russian nuclear doctrine of tactical first strike is.

[OUTLAW 09]

This is an interesting interview with one of the surviving Russian airborne types that got beaten up on when they convoyed into the Ukraine.

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/09/0...whole-company/

Notice he mentions not once but twice the alleged involvement of an American radio intercept/jammer unit in the Ukraine that was used against them.

Interesting as this alleged bit of information also was stated by Russia back when the Crimea was being occupied/annexed.

Russia claimed then that it was the 66th MI Group out of Germany.

Are they still telling that story to their troops during deployment prep?