Ukraine crisis

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

The military implications of globalisation, from the Telegraph

“Vladimir Putin ‘running out’ of missiles – because parts are made in Ukraine

A substantial portion of fighter jet engines and tank components are made in Ukrainian factories, which no longer supply Russian forces”

[bardin1]

I think there is a bit of wishful thinking on this thread, borne out of over acceptance of the 'good news' propaganda. Much of it is, I am sure , true, but he fact is that Russia has hugely more resources to throw at this than Ukraine does and is also ruthless in the use of these. Russian capture Izyium in the south east and the failure to retake Kherson (despite a Ukraine minister saying last week it was imminent) suggest this might be a war of attrition not a Russian collapse as we all hope.

[c-a-r-f-r-e-w]

“As the German government prepared for the worst, major European Gazprom customers such as Uniper and OMV were left studying Putin’s announcements, with Gazprom only starting to notify clients on Friday about the new payment arrangements. Austria's OMV said it had initial contact from Gazprom but was waiting for written information on Friday, while Denmark’s Orsted said it had not yet been contacted.

Under the decree, foreign buyers need to transfer foreign currency to a special account at Gazprombank, which will then buy roubles on behalf of the gas buyer to transfer to another account used to pay for the gas.

The moves do not go as far as some had feared. “If it were a change to payment terms then there is a risk you would be reopening contracts and people would probably use it to extract something in return, which can create disruption,” says Trevor Sikorski, head of natural gas at Energy Aspects. “It feels like there is less chance of that now.”

Yet many also interpret the order as handing an advantage to Putin by strengthening Gazprombank’s role, helping to further protect Russia’s third-largest lender from widening sanctions against Russia’s financial sector.”

Telegraph

[hireton]

This Turkish journalist is normally well informed:

[hireton]

In depth analysis of current Russian military capacity:

[birdseye]

Apr 2, 2022 16:16:08 GMT c-a-r-f-r-e-w said:

“As the German government prepared for the worst, major European Gazprom customers such as Uniper and OMV were left studying Putin’s announcements, with Gazprom only starting to notify clients on Friday about the new payment arrangements. Austria's OMV said it had initial contact from Gazprom but was waiting for written information on Friday, while Denmark’s Orsted said it had not yet been contacted.

Under the decree, foreign buyers need to transfer foreign currency to a special account at Gazprombank, which will then buy roubles on behalf of the gas buyer to transfer to another account used to pay for the gas.

The moves do not go as far as some had feared. “If it were a change to payment terms then there is a risk you would be reopening contracts and people would probably use it to extract something in return, which can create disruption,” says Trevor Sikorski, head of natural gas at Energy Aspects. “It feels like there is less chance of that now.”

Yet many also interpret the order as handing an advantage to Putin by strengthening Gazprombank’s role, helping to further protect Russia’s third-largest lender from widening sanctions against Russia’s financial sector.”

Telegraph

Rather depends on what exchange rate Gazprombank give

[lululemonmustdobetter]

Looks like the the battle of Mariupol is coming to an end as the defenders essentially run out of ammunition. I also guess food supplies were probably exhausted.

www.google.com/search?q=battle+of+mariupol+2022&rlz=1C1CHFX_en-GBGB568GB568&oq=&aqs=chrome.1.35i39i362l3j46i39i199i362i465j46i39i362j46i39i199i291i362j35i39i362l2.2863770911j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

There has been very little reliable information on Ukrainian losses in either men or material for a number of reasons (effective control of information by the Ukrainian government, Ukrainian civilians are naturally much less likely to post images of destroyed Ukrainian hardware than they are Russian etc). When I last looked in detail, Western sources seemed to be assuming equivalent losses in terms of casualties. In Mariupol it looks like the Ukrainians have lost 3500 military personnel either killed/wounded or surrendered.

If this does turn into a longer war of attrition in which Russia seeks to isolate and cut of areas of resistance and then reduce in this manner, then the sooner Europe takes the plunge and embargoes imports of Russian gas and oil the better. A number of commentators are making the point that Europe buys $1billion worth of Russian energy imports a day whilst the cost of the war for Russia is $1billion.

Currently Russian military morale is low and they are forced to re-organise due to the disastrous failed attempt to capture Kyiv. But one shouldn't assume that their morale wont improve or that their logistical, organisational and tactical performance wont improve.

If the West's aim is truly to defeat Russia and remove Putin then they should apply maximum pressure now through trade embargo on energy imports from Russia and supplying the Ukrainians with sufficient offensive material quickly to allow them to press the advantages they currently have before the Russian military can recover from its recent setbacks.

My greatest wish is for the fighting to stop, but I would much rather a short conflict than a long drawn out one where the eventual outcome is uncertain. I fear the West's (in)actions will only serve to elongate the length of the war and the suffering.

[johntel]

It looks like things are coming to a head in Kherson - today there are reports that most of the Russia troops on the right bank of the river (on a map it looks like the northern part) have been withdrawn. The Russians are establishing defensive lines on the left bank and forcing civilians in a 15km strip to leave the area. Presumably this is so their troops can occupy the vacated houses over the winter and to protect against counter-insurgency.

[birdseye]

Apr 2, 2022 15:35:21 GMT bardin1 said:

I think there is a bit of wishful thinking on this thread, borne out of over acceptance of the 'good news' propaganda. Much of it is, I am sure , true, but he fact is that Russia has hugely more resources to throw at this than Ukraine does and is also ruthless in the use of these. Russian capture Izyium in the south east and the failure to retake Kherson (despite a Ukraine minister saying last week it was imminent) suggest this might be a war of attrition not a Russian collapse as we all hope.

There is one major reason why this is likely - the Russians can stand back and destroy much of the Ukraine confident that little or nopthing will happen to Russian territory since the Ukrainians dont have that capability. Kiev can be flattened  - Moscow cant.

[johntel]

Following the re-capture of Kherson the next target for Ukraine is presumably to clear the coastal strip between southern Kherson and Mariupol. I guess trying to establish a bridgehead directly across the river would be very difficult. Maybe they can clear an area to the west of Kherson with artillery and attempt a crossing? Or maybe more likely probe all along the contact line from Vasylivka to Grafske to find a weakness in the defence line.

liveuamap.com/#

Update 14/11 It looks like an operation is underway to secure a bridgehead on the Kinburn Spit, the western extremity of the left bank of the Dniepr.

[bardin1]

What a relief!

Just prior to the invasion February i was playing an online chess match for Tayside and Perthshire against Kherson. My opponent, a medical man, and I had a few exchanges of messages in which I wished him well and he updated me as the Russians approached, took over , then began to turn the screws (they were taking the medical supplies out of the hospital where he worked, for example). Then - silence. I didn't message him any more but could see he was still playing chess online, but not matches. I didn't want to message him as the internet connection could be monitored or his laptop seized.

Then as Kherson Oblast was evacuated by the Russians he suddenly went totally offline., For 7 days there has been nothing, even when the Ukranians took over, even when they began to restore the intenret actions. I honestly thought he was eitehr dead or had been taken by the Russians because of his medical expertise.

Then just now:

"Hello. Alive... without electricity, water, gas, almost no Internet, under fire, but liberation!!! The vacation at chess com has ended, and I can't contact the admins to renew it ((( "

I've just sorted out his chess access for him online so all is well (or it least it would be if he had some water, but the chess was clearly very important to him as a psychological lifeline).

[alec]

bardin1 - I always find it strange to see how support can come from and to people in distress in uniquely individual ways. Well played.

[Danny]

ISW daily report had a couple of interesting things.

They continue to suggest Russia is fast using up its supply of precision cruise missiles. Yesterday it had another round of using these. The attack was timed to coincide with the G20 conference and Zelensky's speech, but due to the preparation involved in setting up a coordinated attack, must have been arranged beforehand and was not a response to anything he said. Despite russian claims his speech and unwillingness to negotiate triggered the attack. The interception rate by Ukrainians seems to be improving, credited to the continuing arrival of more western air defence systems. Maybe an interesting aspect is there didnt seem to have been many drone attacks compared to missiles.

There seems to have been a Russian cockup in attacks against Pavlivka. It seems Russia had planned attacks against Vuhledar, but Russian generals abandoned these plans because the troops available to them were incapable of it. However they were overruled and ordered to stage an attack anyway, suffering heavy losses particularly to the 155th naval brigade. Not quite sure what this is, but it sounds like a regular formation suffered heavy losses because it was committed to an impossible attack with only badly trained conscript support. This all because of the need for a 'good news' story what with abandoning Kherson. Russia has reported this as successfull attacks.

Russia has strong cntrol of the media, but some 'milbloggers' continue to be allowed. These have attacked various people for the failed attack, but in particular are addressing their fire higher up the command chain to generals with overall control of the operation. ISW have before suggested these people are allowed to continue posting because it suits the kremlin for defeats to be seen as the fault of the professional military senior command. Mostly suits them, anyway. The idea seems to be Putin and the nation were let down by the generals. Small scale protests against conscription, and also against utterly incompetent management of same taking wholly unsuitable people to fill quotas, continue within Russia. Bit of attack there from both sides, those wholly against and those wanting it done properly.

Russia continues to try to take operational control of the zaporizhzhia nuclear plant from Ukraine. By continuing to demand international recognition as the operator of the plant, and now by trying to bring in Russian engineers to man it.

Russians are reported to have further moved back military command posts, staging areas, etc, from the front lines. Argument continues whether the US should provide ukraine wth longer range rockets.

Russia seems to be establishing defensive lines 15-20km back from the Dnipro river, which I guess is because they fear shelling or rocket attacks on anything closer. While the River remains an obstacle to landing large numbers of troops on the Russian side, obviously that means they have conceded yet more territory and moved the battleground further towards Crimea. Again this highlights the importance of long range weapons for ukraine (or indeed Russia in its infrastructure attacks).

[Danny]

ISW reporting Russians seem to be preparing multiple lines of defence behind each other. Doesnt sound like they are especially confident of holding their current lines. In part this probably reflects Ukraine's ability now to attack behind Russian lines with missiles and disrupt supply lines in particular towards Crimea, which is mostly an island with limited access from Russia. ISW argue that the reason Russia withdrew from Kherson was significantly because it was unable to supply its troops north of the river, with Ukraine blowing up supply routes. Similar issues apply to the whole of the occupied region.

Russia is doing something similar, but it plainly is unable to find important military targets in Ukraine and instead is trying to disrupt the national energy supply.

Russia is starting to replace Ukrainian collaborators in key positions in occupied regions with actual Russians. Some suggestion they fear the collaborators might not continue to be reliable.

[Mr Poppy]

I admit to not really following the day-day events in Ukraine anymore but being a polling forum then I thought I'd post some NATO polling on the 'Issue Specific' thread. I made a comment on the main thread WRT to concern that some countries' leaders might start to get 'bored' (not the best word to use) with Putin's illegal war in Ukraine and that they might try to push Zelenskyy to agree terms for 'peace'. OBR noted the sensitivity of their forecast to gas prices and that is a common concern across most of the World (certainly most of the 'West' and most of rWorld as well - notably energy importing nations or countries whose local energy prices are set by regional/global prices).

Various polling shows folks think Ukraine is winning/will win but IMO Putin needs to be seen to have lost and we are not at that point yet:

Americans are now more likely to say Ukraine is winning the war, not Russia
today.yougov.com/topics/international/articles-reports/2022/09/21/americans-are-now-more-likely-say-ukraine-winning

Anyway, NATO itself has IMO become stronger and more united with folks in all NATO countries firmly supporting NATO and some NATO polling that backs that up:

www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/6/pdf/220622-pre-summit-research-2022.pdf

The two issues should not be conflated. NATO is much stronger and more united than the period just before Putin's war BUT that is different to a growing concern that I have that some countries (notably US, but possibly 'others') will start to apply pressure on Zelenskyy to agree a 'peace' due to the high economic cost of the ongoing war. As we saw in Afghanistan then if US decide they are 'bored' then no one else is likely to continue support. I very much hope we don't make the same mistake again and that we stay the course with full support given to Ukraine until Ukraine decide, for themselves, to seek an end to the war that was forced upon them. Any peace that is agreed is unlikely to be honoured by Putin so the 'lines' drawn on any new map should IMO show that Putin has lost this time - but that should be for Ukraine to decide, with the full backing of NATO, when Ukraine decides to do so. 

[Deleted]

"Newborn baby killed in Zaporizhzhia
We’ve also been hearing about another attack on a hospital in Ukraine’s southern Zaporizhzhia region overnight, which killed a two-day-old baby. The child’s mother managed to escape the maternity ward with a doctor who was seriously injured, according to Ukrainian emergency services."

"Two Ukrainian nuclear power plants disconnected from grid
The Interfax-Ukraine news agency has reported that Ukraine's Khmelnytskyy and South Ukrainian nuclear power plants have been disconnected from the national electricity grid following the Russian air attack.
MP Oleksiy Honcharenko said that the power units of the South Ukrainian NPP - Ukraine's second-largest, in the south-west - had an "emergency shutdown"."

"Seventy missiles fired, 51 intercepted - Ukraine Air Force
As we've been reporting, Russia has launched multiple missile strikes across Ukraine today, hitting both residential and critical infrastructure sites and causing mass power outages across the country.
According to the Ukrainian Air Force, air defences managed to intercept 51 of the 70 cruise missiles fired by Russia today. Some of the explosions have been reported in the south and south-east of the country."

BBC today

How on earth are these people surviving ?

[Danny]

Well, they survive because they have to. Its called war. Russia is attacking Ukrainian infrastructure because its an obvious line of attack and because its working better than anything else.

What I am curious about is how we are trying to help them. Presumably they need electrical grid engineers and spare parts. Or indeed new external power connections to get electricity into Ukraine. Has the Uk ordered its electrical industry to send help?

[Deleted]

Nov 24, 2022 8:38:36 GMT Danny said:

Well, they survive because they have to. Its called war. Russia is attacking Ukrainian infrastructure because its an obvious line of attack and because its working better than anything else.

What I am curious about is how we are trying to help them. Presumably they need electrical grid engineers and spare parts. Or indeed new external power connections to get electricity into Ukraine. Has the Uk ordered its electrical industry to send help?

Why is it an "obvious" line of attack?. Freezing the population through winter doesn't gain territory. It is terrorism.


More than half of the country's grid in need of repair.Head of Ukraine’s power grid operator says almost no thermal or hydroelectric stations left unscathed by Russian attacks.

Ukraine has 15 operable nuclear reactors at four plants that generate about half of its electricity.They were  cut off from power yesterday according  to Ukraine’s State Nuclear Agency.

How do you expect us to "help" them with this disaster ?

[Danny]

Nov 24, 2022 8:59:32 GMT colin said:

Why is it an "obvious" line of attack?. Freezing the population through winter doesn't gain territory. It is terrorism.

Yes its terrorism, but what is your point? Terrorists blow things up because they believe it will achieve their aims. The rationale for protestors to glue themselves to roads is much the same. However, in this case if Ukraine has no electricity, then chances are its war effort will be severely affected, its a real military objective. Although i am sure they think Ukrainians freezing to death can only help their other problems of getting rid of the current
population before replacing them with Russians.

How do you expect us to "help" them with this disaster ?

Electrical infrastructure materials would seem to be at least as important for the west to supply as military equipment. It might be politically harder however to tell the Uk that in the event of a tree falling on a power line there may be a considerable delay in fixing it because we have sent the polish engineers off to Ukraine to work there. (and I'm serious: I dont know what nationality it was, but i spoke to a whole gang of high voltage pylon engineers once here, who all spoke to each other in foreign. Could have been Ukrainians for all I knew.) whereas militarily we have been sending them our second rate equipment from storage, and getting our guys to train theirs, which is useful certainly, but hardly an additional cost because they would just have been practicing soldiering anyway.

We arent seriously trying to ensure they win.

[pjw1961]

I posted a while back some observations from an academic called John Curry on Ukraine. He is a wargaming the Ukraine conflict and I should stress that he is not some guy sat in a basement somewhere; he has worked on wargames with the MOD and Pentagon. Here is a link to his background. www.bathspa.ac.uk/our-people/john-curry/

Anyway, he has recently blogged that based on his Ukraine wargame simulation he believes that the Russian army is on the brink of collapse. This is a version of his post edited by me to give the main conclusions only:

"I have been wargaming the Ukraine War since it began. To be clear this was for professional reasons, not for entertainment. I believe, as of November 2022, the Russian army in the Ukraine is on the verge of collapse. My prediction is the Russian army will rout by the end of the winter.

My pre-war games predicted the actual outcome of the Russian advance grinding to a halt. Ukraine was just too large, with too large an army, with too few axis of advance. Russian logistics meant their axis of advance were rapidly reduced to just a few lines of assault along major roads. Russian airpower and PGMs started by hitting strategic targets, then was reallocated to tactical targets as the advance slowed down. Since the initial games, I have continued to update the game as it moved into the static phase, then the Ukraine counter attack.

Neither side has shown operational brilliance; the war is all about amassing sufficient supplies in order to launch an attack, as well as causing attrition on the other side with indirect fire.

My game included a Ukraine advance on the east front, until it ran out of supplies, followed by an advance on Kherson.

My wargame has also found that Russia no longer has the PGMs or airpower to cripple Ukraine’s critical national infrastructure. The Ukraine air defence works, the Russian attack does not work very well, the latter has exhausted most of its munition stock. Ukraine infrastructure is based on the Cold War and was designed to withstand NATO attack.

My model suggests both sides are near their break point as they approach 50% losses, however Ukraine has a higher break point that Russia. I based this on the fact that Ukraine has maintained a policy of individual troop rotation, for example giving leave for soldiers to attend weddings and funerals, as well as rotating units out of the front line. Ukraine is also defending its home territory.

There are important questions that will probably be only answered with post war analysis, such as how are the Russian casualties distributed between units of differing training, morale, capabilities and equipment? Or is the entire Russian Army riddled with incompetence due to decades of corruption? Do the Russians have some units in reserve that actually know how to fight?

Prediction is always hard, especially predictions about the future. However, my wargame-based analysis says the Russian army is going to collapse, Ukraine is going to retake most of its lost territory. Of course, I might be wrong, but is it better to base a prediction on a tried and tested wargame model or just a well written piece of narrative as appears in our national newspapers?"

PGM = Precision Guided Missile

[lens]

Interesting post pjw1961. I find it interesting to think what a realistic endgame might be - what BOTH sides may settle on eventually as achievable - if far from desirable from either side.

If a betting man, I'd put my money on the Ukrainians getting back all territories except Crimea, and possibly even with acceptance (by Russia) of Ukraine moving politically much further to the West, possibly even with future membership of the EU and even NATO?

Hardly what Russia and Putin would want - but maybe a formal acknowledgement (internationally) of Crimea being Russian would at least allow some sort of victory to be proclaimed? Obviously Zelensky would prefer the endgame to be Crimea included in returned territory, but surely Russia would just go on fighting rather than go as far as that?

[alec]

lens and pjw1961- interesting. That has been my non-expert view since the defeat around Kharkiv.

[johntel]

Nov 28, 2022 0:28:26 GMT lens said:

....

Hardly what Russia and Putin would want - but maybe a formal acknowledgement (internationally) of Crimea being Russian would at least allow some sort of victory to be proclaimed? Obviously Zelensky would prefer the endgame to be Crimea included in returned territory, but surely Russia would just go on fighting rather than go as far as that?

lens I agree with this. I think there'd need to be a new UN-monitored referendum in Crimea which I've no doubt Russia would win and a U.N. policed buffer zone in Donbas.

[lens]

Nov 28, 2022 6:55:02 GMT alec said:

lens and pjw1961 - interesting. That has been my non-expert view since the defeat around Kharkiv.

Well, I consider my own view pretty non-expert as well..... 

One other point to consider is Western support. Pretty robust up to now....... but may it have limits? If a proposal such as above (Russia keeping just Crimea, and such being recognised) was put formally, and if Russia accepted it with guarantees, but Zelensky didn't, is it worth considering how then the rest of the world (esp US and EU) would react? 

It's also along the lines of what Elon Musk put forward last month. Maybe voicing what many in America think would be a pragmatic end - even if their politicians daren't say such themselves?

[alec]

lens - I think that's going to be the crunch decision. If the claims of an immanent Russian collapse are accurate, then Ukraine would probably sweep right through, but the other calculation would be what would the west gain from allowing an early peace deal. Certainly less money on weapons, but that's the lesser part in many ways when compared to energy prices, but I'm not sure an agreement would lead back to reliable energy supplies that quickly.

But I could well be wrong.

[bardin1]

I am not so positive as others on this, though I would love it to be so and would be delighted to be proved wrong. Russia has been making incremental advances around Bakhmut and South west of Donetsk. There is no sign of them collapsing just yet. They also seem to be amassing more missiles for another attack on infrastructure and are reputedly buying more from China.

I think so long as Ukraine can hold out until after Christmas the winter weather may be Russia's undoing but it likely to be internal dissension rather than a Ukrainian advance I would guess.

there are two areas where Ukraine might make progress. One is around Svatove and Kremmina where they might be able to turn the screw enough to force a Russian withdrawal. The other is the Kinburn spit where they might be able to turn the rest of that area above Crimea into a difficult area for Russia to hold.


If the West can supply more air capability and/ or missiles with longer range (surely overdue as Russia are using them on Ukraine) then that might be different but it is clearly a risk to do so.
A sign to look w=for in my mind would be

[Danny]

Nov 28, 2022 0:28:26 GMT lens said:

Interesting post pjw1961. I find it interesting to think what a realistic endgame might be - what BOTH sides may settle on eventually as achievable - if far from desirable from either side.

If a betting man, I'd put my money on the Ukrainians getting back all territories except Crimea, and possibly even with acceptance (by Russia) of Ukraine moving politically much further to the West, possibly even with future membership of the EU and even NATO?

Hardly what Russia and Putin would want - but maybe a formal acknowledgement (internationally) of Crimea being Russian would at least allow some sort of victory to be proclaimed? Obviously Zelensky would prefer the endgame to be Crimea included in returned territory, but surely Russia would just go on fighting rather than go as far as that?

Its hard to see ukraine settling for anything less than total removal of Russia from Ukrainian territory, including Crimea. It would only do so if it had absolutely no choice, which would probably only happen if the US orders it to settle and threatens to stop supplying weapons. Even then Ukraine might fight on, probably lose, and that would put the US in a very very difficult position having abandoned a winnable fight and an ally. However we are in the situation that the US is still forcing Ukraine to fight with one hand tied as it is not providing weapons with the range to hit Russia, or also effectively hit targets in parts of occupied Ukraine. Russians are visibly basing themselves just out of current range and it would be immensely helpful if ukaine had longer range weapons to hit them.

Ukraine cannot make a truce because Russia will attack again unless it is comprehensively defeated. No one can possibly believe otherwise since this is already the second Invasion of Ukraine, and Russia has essentially declared Ukraine is rightfully it own territory. In no way can Russia be able to claim a victory from this, as that essentially guarantees a third invasion. If Ukraine has Russia retreating enough to have achieved this level of success, then there is no reason not to continue and push russia entirely out of Crimes. Once they get close enough they will use the weapons they already have to hit the kerch bridge and completely close it. The bridge was built to enable military support to Crimea and is essential to it withstanding a military siege.

The general view from ISW seems to be Russia doesnt have enough troops to defend what it already holds. Its defences are being positioned too far apart so they can be encircled. Moreover winter is approaching and then this will become a game of troops freezing to death. Especially I suspect if they are stationed in the middle of nowhere supposedly guarding against Ukrainian advances. They expect the war to pick up once the ground is properly frozen to allow large vehicles to travel cross country.


Oh, and ukraine expects to come out of this now with NATO membership, or at least some other form of mutual guatantee with real teeth. This war has already set a precedent for NATO expansion.

[lens]

Nov 28, 2022 18:59:53 GMT Danny said:

Nov 28, 2022 0:28:26 GMT lens said:

Interesting post pjw1961. I find it interesting to think what a realistic endgame might be - what BOTH sides may settle on eventually as achievable - if far from desirable from either side.

If a betting man, I'd put my money on the Ukrainians getting back all territories except Crimea, and possibly even with acceptance (by Russia) of Ukraine moving politically much further to the West, possibly even with future membership of the EU and even NATO?

Hardly what Russia and Putin would want - but maybe a formal acknowledgement (internationally) of Crimea being Russian would at least allow some sort of victory to be proclaimed? Obviously Zelensky would prefer the endgame to be Crimea included in returned territory, but surely Russia would just go on fighting rather than go as far as that?

Ukraine cannot make a truce because Russia will attack again unless it is comprehensively defeated. No one can possibly believe otherwise since this is already the second Invasion of Ukraine, and Russia has essentially declared Ukraine is rightfully it own territory. ............

Oh, and ukraine expects to come out of this now with NATO membership, or at least some other form of mutual guatantee with real teeth. This war has already set a precedent for NATO expansion.

I think you've there more or less answered your own question!? NATO membership for Ukraine would mean Russia would not attack again.

Russia is not going to be "comprehensively defeated". (And I'm not sure even talking about "collapse" is very helpful.) Being "forced to withdraw from Ukrainian territory" is not the same as "comprehensively defeated". Think it through. In a best case scenario - for Ukraine - the Russian army suffers defeat after defeat and Ukraine takes back all territories, even including Crimea. Then what? I do not see them going further - attacking Russian territory - as such would be really crossing a red line - and could give Russia the excuse to use nuclear weapons with some international justification. It's hardly an accident that Ukraine has so far limited it's actions to attacks on occupied Ukrainian territory.

So if Ukraine have retaken all currently occupied lands, but daren't carry out attacks within Russia, then what? Without an agreed peace treaty, Ukraine can expect indefinite attacks by drone and missile as we have seen recently. They've retaken their territory, but even if the Russian army may be described as "collapsed" on the battlefield, the Russians are still likely to be able to mount such drone/missile strikes.

This HAS to end in some sort of agreed solution. And IMO one that may lead Ukraine to such as NATO membership of some sort, to guarantee Russia will not attack again. And if we believe Russia is becoming increasingly keen to find a way out without being seen to totally capitulate, then offering up Crimea may be the very least it will take to agree such. Let's not forget that Crimea has historically been part of Russia, and only became part of "the Ukraine" in the 1950's - but as both Russia and Ukraine were then elements of the Soviet Union, with Stalin having only just died, it was first and foremost part of the Soviet Union!

[bardin1]

Nov 29, 2022 0:10:12 GMT lens said:

Nov 28, 2022 18:59:53 GMT Danny said:

I think you've there more or less answered your own question!? NATO membership for Ukraine would mean Russia would not attack again.

Russia is not going to be "comprehensively defeated". (And I'm not sure even talking about "collapse" is very helpful.) Being "forced to withdraw from Ukrainian territory" is not the same as "comprehensively defeated". Think it through. In a best case scenario - for Ukraine - the Russian army suffers defeat after defeat and Ukraine takes back all territories, even including Crimea. Then what? I do not see them going further - attacking Russian territory - as such would be really crossing a red line - and could give Russia the excuse to use nuclear weapons with some international justification. It's hardly an accident that Ukraine has so far limited it's actions to attacks on occupied Ukrainian territory.

So if Ukraine have retaken all currently occupied lands, but daren't carry out attacks within Russia, then what? Without an agreed peace treaty, Ukraine can expect indefinite attacks by drone and missile as we have seen recently. They've retaken their territory, but even if the Russian army may be described as "collapsed" on the battlefield, the Russians are still likely to be able to mount such drone/missile strikes.

This HAS to end in some sort of agreed solution. And IMO one that may lead Ukraine to such as NATO membership of some sort, to guarantee Russia will not attack again. And if we believe Russia is becoming increasingly keen to find a way out without being seen to totally capitulate, then offering up Crimea may be the very least it will take to agree such. Let's not forget that Crimea has historically been part of Russia, and only became part of "the Ukraine" in the 1950's - but as both Russia and Ukraine were then elements of the Soviet Union, with Stalin having only just died, it was first and foremost part of the Soviet Union!

I think you are correct in your assessment. My only caveat would be that perhaps Crimea, Donbas and Luhansk oblasts could be 'demilitarised, with Donbas and Luhansk being part of Ukraine, and Crimea part of Russia.

[johntel]

It looks like Ukraine could be preparing for a breakthrough in Zaporozhyia

"The Armed Forces of Ukraine are building up a grouping of forces in the Zaporozhye region and are "probing" the line of defense. This was stated by Vladimir Rogov, a member of the main council of the regional administration.
"The command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is increasing the grouping of troops in Dnepropetrovsk and the part of the Zaporozhye region controlled by it and is trying to probe the line of defense and our positions with sorties of small assault groups. But our army is ready for any provocations by the enemy. Fortifications are being built at full speed," RIA Novosti quoted Rogov as saying.

Also

These places are about half way to the coast.