|
|
Post by John Chanin on May 5, 2024 15:42:57 GMT
The PNV simply adds estimates for areas that didn't vote this time to actual votes for those that did. It cannot be simply translated to a General Election, because of course votes at local elections are much higher for Liberals, Greens, and there are many successful independents. It is politically illiterate, and generally innumerate, to use PNV in this way. PNV is best seen in comparison to previous years' calculations of the same figure, although even there the influence of votes for other than Labour and Conservative varies from year to year, as does their take from either Labour or Conservative. There is of course serious commentary based on this figure, although not from the idiots at Sky, who seem to have little idea about what local elections are for. Their whole coverage has been risible. , do you have a link that explains the PNV methodology you can share? I have been looking but cant find one, only high level articles. Thanks!This is an old link but may help. It is what Curtice does for the BBC. Rallings & Thrasher do one as well, and they aren't quite the same.
Ah found the new one electionsetc.com/2024/05/01/understanding-the-local-elections-projected-national-share-pns-in-2024/ |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on May 5, 2024 16:04:53 GMT
For the benefit of our resident reality deniers.
Lib Dems have gained most council seats in last five years.
Party has gained 768 seats, Labour 545 and the Greens 480, while the Conservatives has lost 1,783
Vote lib dem you get lib dem.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 5, 2024 16:14:07 GMT
Sad to hear that Bernard Hill has died. Boys from the Blackstuff is in my top 3 TV series ever - who could forget him as Yosser Hughes pleading 'Gizza job'?
|
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on May 5, 2024 16:33:29 GMT
Hi John. Thanks for posting this. It was one of the sites I had already visited, but it does not really outline in detail the methodology used. For example, how is London/Scotland treated this year? How do they estimate it? Its not clear exactly what assumptions they make, and how that's applied to the data.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 5, 2024 16:39:22 GMT
Ukraine War: Seems that the Russian advances are slowing and their losses rising, with estimates of 1000 deaths per day for the last week or so, a marked uptick. Whether this is US aid coming through or not I don't know, but UK and French defense sources estimate total Russian losses at 465,000 and 500,000, which are really staggering numbers. Phillips O'Brian offers an alternative narrative on the last few months, suggesting that the analysts saying Ukraine was on the verge of collapse are largely the same ones who predicted a rapid Russian victory at the outset, and who want Ukraine to negotiate a settlement. O'Brian points out that since January, the supposed large scale advances by Russia amount to no more than 10 miles in the main contested areas, and have come at a ferocious cost, even thought Ukrainian forces are short of munitions and exhausted. Where the Russians have broken through they have failed to exploit their advances, which is likely due to their own capacity issues. The scale of Russian advances is on a par with what Ukraine achieved in the Autumn, which was called a failure in the west. In that case, Ukraine were up against an opponent with no end of supplies and munitions, which helps contextualize the relative achievements of each side.
O'Brian suggests that the real lesson is that head on attack is very difficult, but long range engagement with the right weapons is the way to go. The west needs to supply the weapons.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 5, 2024 17:41:37 GMT
Electoral strategy stuff, in the Times:
“When Labour surprisingly lost the by-election last year in Uxbridge & South Ruislip, Boris Johnson’s old seat, McSweeney conducted a top-to-bottom review of the Labour election machine. Insiders say he will hold a stock-take meeting with Starmer early this week and look at everything the election data is saying to help decide messaging and where they need to deploy resources in the months ahead.
Provisional analysis by Labour’s data team shows that their share of the vote is now much more efficiently distributed than under Corbyn, when the party tended to stack up votes in places where it was already strong rather than in marginal constituencies. “We were poor at putting together coalitions to win,” a Labour source said. “In 2019 if we had beaten the Tories by 12 per cent we would have got a majority of one, because of where our votes were. One of the key things we wanted to achieve when Keir became leader was to change that.
“We thought we could change that with two types of voters: one is non-graduate voters in England; two is in Scotland. We think this week’s results show we’ve got the breadth of support to win across the country. Because of voter efficiency, the winning line is no longer a 12-point lead, it is much lower.”
‘They must be innumerate’
For Sunak the most important moment, when he was effectively declared safe as the leader of the Conservative Party, was around noon on Friday, when it became clear that Houchen had won, albeit with a reduced majority. That morning, one of the leading rebels in a plot to replace the prime minister contacted journalists and said: “Houchen is the decider, for better or worse.”
In fact, the plotters in the self-styled Conservative Britain Alliance had met three weeks ago at an office in Soho and decided there were three tripwires that had to be triggered to set off a new onslaught against the prime minister. Houchen and Andy Street would have to lose and the Tories come in third behind Reform in the Blackpool South by-election.
In the event, the Conservatives held on to second in Blackpool by 117 votes and by mid-afternoon on Friday Labour was conceding defeat to Street.”
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 5, 2024 17:44:04 GMT
“At that meeting three weeks ago, the rebels decided that they would “pull our punches” if all three tripwires were not triggered. A series of stories revealing decisions Sunak has made in government, which would damage him with the Tory right and were likely to include his decisions on immigration, have now been shelved.
Key figures on the right decided they did not really have a candidate to replace Sunak and that they did not really trust Penny Mordaunt, who had emerged as the frontrunner. Nonetheless, Mordaunt and her most determined outriders continued to have meetings, as we reported last weekend, to stitch together an agreement which would have gone into motion if the results had been worse for Sunak. Now the rebels have decided Sunak should “own” the expected general election defeat.
Labour strategists are baffled by the decision of the Tory rebels. “They must be innumerate,” a Starmer aide said. “If you look at the difference between the police and crime commissioner vote and the Street vote in Birmingham you can see what a drag Sunak is on the ticket for them. If they’re paying attention to the numbers, they should be getting rid of him. The guy’s a loser.””
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 5, 2024 17:52:06 GMT
O'Brian suggests that the real lesson is that head on attack is very difficult, but long range engagement with the right weapons is the way to go. The west needs to supply the weapons. Think it was in the Times the other day it said that Sunak was committing 3 billion a year to Ukraine, and crucially that they would now be free of the requirement to only use the weapons within Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 5, 2024 17:55:22 GMT
Ukraine War: Seems that the Russian advances are slowing and their losses rising, with estimates of 1000 deaths per day for the last week or so, a marked uptick. Whether this is US aid coming through or not I don't know, but UK and French defense sources estimate total Russian losses at 465,000 and 500,000, which are really staggering numbers. Phillips O'Brian offers an alternative narrative on the last few months, suggesting that the analysts saying Ukraine was on the verge of collapse are largely the same ones who predicted a rapid Russian victory at the outset, and who want Ukraine to negotiate a settlement. Staggering indeed. Wikipedia quotes 744,000 killed and missing for the UK in the whole of the Great War. It must be a real meat-grinder over there. |
|
|
|
Post by lens on May 5, 2024 17:56:21 GMT
Ukraine War: Seems that the Russian advances are slowing and their losses rising, with estimates of 1000 deaths per day for the last week or so, a marked uptick. ......... Phillips O'Brian offers an alternative narrative on the last few months, suggesting that the analysts saying Ukraine was on the verge of collapse are largely the same ones who predicted a rapid Russian victory at the outset, and who want Ukraine to negotiate a settlement. But ultimately, isn't a negotiated settlement the inevitable end game? Maybe Russian advances are slowing at the moment, but does anyone really think the situation is going to transform towards rapid Ukrainian advances? Isn't slow grinding fighting along a near stationary front line the most likely future in the near/medium term? I simply don't see Ukraine being able to retake even all the east of the country currently occupied by Russia, let alone the Crimea. Yes, weapons from the west are having an effect, but Russia is also receiving support from its allies - notably North Korea, Iran and China, the latter most notably helping Russia build up its war manufacturing industry. But I don't see either side receiving manpower from outside, and it's there Ukraine is at a disadvantage compared to Russia. It's apparently notable that the quality of recruits that are now coming into the Ukrainian army are much less enthusiastic than was the case in the first year. Russian losses may well be high - but so are Ukrainian, if not at the same scale. There is also the financial and physical cost. High for both sides, but far more so for Ukraine. (Eg the problems being caused to energy and transport infrastructure.) It's popular to say "Britain won the Second World War". Maybe true - but at the expense of bankrupting the country, and certainly at the cost of the Empire. Ultimately WW2 HAD to be a fight to the finish, but that is not true of most wars. I just don't see the west allowing Ukraine to be totally overrun and occupied, but equally I don't see Ukraine ever being able to push Russia back to the borders of 10 years ago by pure force. (And even if they did, what then?) So realistically we're back to a negotiated settlement, and the question then is of red lines on both sides. For Russia, I would say Crimea is the ultimate, and international recognition that such is part of Russia. For Ukraine, a lasting settlement, and possibly (??) Russian acceptance that Ukraine may become part of the EU and even (?) part of NATO in due course. The question then is where the final and recognised border will then be drawn in the east, and that is likely why the current fighting over front lines is considered important - both sides trying to consolidate before any negotiations start. Believe me, I'd like to be proven wrong on this, and like for Ukraine to recover all invaded territories (including Crimea) before a lasting peace. But I'd take a pretty big bet that the chances of such an eventual outcome are vanishingly small. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 5, 2024 18:02:02 GMT
lensPretty good summary. I think I agree with every word. It seems that the way of warfare has changed. I know they still need troops to occupy ground but tanks, surface ships and even aircraft are far less useful than they were if your opponent has sufficient supplies of modern rockets and drones.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 5, 2024 18:05:16 GMT
“By contrast, having a right-wing Tory candidate in Hall did not stem support for Reform UK. The party, led by Richard Tice, failed to push the Tories into third place in Blackpool South and their vote share of 17 per cent was much lower than Ukip used to achieve in similar circumstances. Experts say you would expect a party polling as it is nationally to score around 27 per cent in a prominent by-election. That said, Reform is taking far more votes from the Tories than Ukip did, which also leeched a sizeable number of votes from Labour, so its capacity to hurt the Conservatives is magnified”
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 5, 2024 18:23:26 GMT
lens Pretty good summary. I think I agree with every word. It seems that the way of warfare has changed. I know they still need troops to occupy ground but tanks, surface ships and even aircraft are far less useful than they were if your opponent has sufficient supplies of modern rockets and drones. Yes, and manned aircraft will be obsolete within the next couple of years too, they will just become big drones. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 5, 2024 18:27:21 GMT
“A Nobel Prize-winning economist who advised Jeremy Corbyn is urging Sir Keir Starmer to ramp up public borrowing and turbocharge investment.
Joseph Stiglitz, an economic guru of the political left, is calling on Labour to be more radical after “underpromising” in the run-up to the general election.
The former World Bank chief economist told The Telegraph: “I think Labour needs a more aggressive public investment agenda. It is the same problem that we have had in the United States with under-investment in infrastructure.””
…
This has led to a warning by Mr Stiglitz, who also formerly advised former US presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, that Britain risks “being left behind” if it fails to embrace net zero.
He said: “Biden said he was going to be spending something like $350bn (£277bn) on the green transition. The current estimates are over $1tn. That is the competitive landscape that Britain has to realise it is facing.
“If Britain does not go for the green transition, it is going to make life more expensive and leave the UK behind.”
Telegraph
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,127
|
Post by domjg on May 5, 2024 18:31:36 GMT
Ukraine War: Seems that the Russian advances are slowing and their losses rising, with estimates of 1000 deaths per day for the last week or so, a marked uptick. Whether this is US aid coming through or not I don't know, but UK and French defense sources estimate total Russian losses at 465,000 and 500,000, which are really staggering numbers. Phillips O'Brian offers an alternative narrative on the last few months, suggesting that the analysts saying Ukraine was on the verge of collapse are largely the same ones who predicted a rapid Russian victory at the outset, and who want Ukraine to negotiate a settlement. Staggering indeed. Wikipedia quotes 744,000 killed and missing for the UK in the whole of the Great War. It must be a real meat-grinder over there. It's really tragic and will have a devastating effect on Russian society for decades to come. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,127
|
Post by domjg on May 5, 2024 18:40:35 GMT
lens I've always assumed that Crimea and the 'self governing' Donbass republics and likely more of the Donbass as well are probably never returning to Ukraine and probably shouldn't, re-integrating potentially not on-side populations is the last thing Ukraine needs when it's rebuilding. For me the issue is the south, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast. I had hoped last year's offensive would win that back but alas not. There is a particular moral imperative I think to be able to recover and rebuild the sacrificial city of Mariupol. Like Strasbourg after the Franco-Prussian war the Ukrainians will always pine for it and grieve the injustice of it's loss and horrific destruction. Likewise I think that if Russia had lost the south there would have been the basis for some longer term restoring of relatively normal relations with the West. As long as Russia still occupies Mariupol anything approaching normal relations will never be possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 5, 2024 19:19:15 GMT
lens - some analysts are looking ahead and thinking through the collapse of Putin's Russia as the exit strategy, rather than the battlefield retaking of Ukraine's lost territory. I've no idea how likely or not that may be, but with the right weapons, Ukraine has demonstrated the capability to strike very deep inside Russia. They could, if they wished, do an awesome level of damage to, for example, Russian oil exports. To date they haven't, largely, it is suspected, because of western pressure not to provoke a global oil crisis. I suspect we'll see some dramatic attacks inside Russia in the months ahead, and mounting pressure on Putin. But where this ends, your guess is as good as mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 5, 2024 19:24:26 GMT
Staggering indeed. Wikipedia quotes 744,000 killed and missing for the UK in the whole of the Great War. It must be a real meat-grinder over there. It's really tragic and will have a devastating effect on Russian society for decades to come. The effect on Ukrainian society will be even greater. The population of Russia is 3.5 times that of Ukraine - so as a % the losses are probably about the same. The Ukrainian losses are never published, but the fact that they are struggling to conscript replacements shows they are suffering just as much. Putin would love this war to continue indefinitely. Maybe Trump is the only one who can stop it. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 5, 2024 19:32:48 GMT
lens - some analysts are looking ahead and thinking through the collapse of Putin's Russia as the exit strategy, rather than the battlefield retaking of Ukraine's lost territory. I've no idea how likely or not that may be, but with the right weapons, Ukraine has demonstrated the capability to strike very deep inside Russia. They could, if they wished, do an awesome level of damage to, for example, Russian oil exports. To date they haven't, largely, it is suspected, because of western pressure not to provoke a global oil crisis. I suspect we'll see some dramatic attacks inside Russia in the months ahead, and mounting pressure on Putin. But where this ends, your guess is as good as mine. But where's the evidence that mounting pressure is having any effect on Putin alec? - quite the opposite if anything, his control is stronger than ever. Continuous escalation will inevitably lead to a nuclear confrontation. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,370
|
Post by Danny on May 5, 2024 19:39:39 GMT
Maybe the plan is no longer to win but to salvage as many seats as possible from the Reform onslaught to live to fight another day? Except there seems to be some evidence the reform vote is really an ABC vote too, just the ones who are inclined to the right. So they still will not be going back to con however much they move rightwards, they would still prefer anyone except con. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 5, 2024 19:42:27 GMT
lens I've always assumed that Crimea and the 'self governing' Donbass republics and likely more of the Donbass as well are probably never returning to Ukraine and probably shouldn't, re-integrating potentially not on-side populations is the last thing Ukraine needs when it's rebuilding. For me the issue is the south, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast. I had hoped last year's offensive would win that back but alas not. There is a particular moral imperative I think to be able to recover and rebuild the sacrificial city of Mariupol. Like Strasbourg after the Franco-Prussian war the Ukrainians will always pine for it and grieve the injustice of it's loss and horrific destruction. Likewise I think that if Russia had lost the south there would have been the basis for some longer term restoring of relatively normal relations with the West. As long as Russia still occupies Mariupol anything approaching normal relations will never be possible. While I tend to agree with your analysis, there were pro-Russian protests in Mariupol in 2014 and it's in the Donetsk region, with its industry based on raw materials which were largely obtained from the occupied area, so it will be difficult to re-integrate into Ukraine. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,370
|
Post by Danny on May 5, 2024 19:46:07 GMT
O'Brian suggests that the real lesson is that head on attack is very difficult, but long range engagement with the right weapons is the way to go. The west needs to supply the weapons. Yeah, but the west does not have them. That silly bit of grandstanding this week when Cameron said Ukraine is allowed to use weapons we supplied to attack Rusia, well there arent very many. The US too has reached the point it has to send first line weapons rather than reserves, and it does not seem to have used the duration of this war to replenish supplies, just using up the old stuff for the most part. We have never taken this war seriously. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 5, 2024 20:01:22 GMT
Ukraine War: Seems that the Russian advances are slowing and their losses rising, with estimates of 1000 deaths per day for the last week or so, a marked uptick. Whether this is US aid coming through or not I don't know, but UK and French defense sources estimate total Russian losses at 465,000 and 500,000, which are really staggering numbers. Phillips O'Brian offers an alternative narrative on the last few months, suggesting that the analysts saying Ukraine was on the verge of collapse are largely the same ones who predicted a rapid Russian victory at the outset, and who want Ukraine to negotiate a settlement. Staggering indeed. Wikipedia quotes 744,000 killed and missing for the UK in the whole of the Great War. It must be a real meat-grinder over there. Apples and pears. The Russian loss above includes a lot of wounded (a testament to modern medicine). The death toll is likely something over 50,000, as per the recent BBC estimate. Still enormous though. Only a totalitarian security state like Russia could get away with it in a war of aggression. Ukraine's losses are also very heavy, but at least people see they were left with no choice but to defend themselves. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 5, 2024 20:05:21 GMT
lens Pretty good summary. I think I agree with every word. It seems that the way of warfare has changed. I know they still need troops to occupy ground but tanks, surface ships and even aircraft are far less useful than they were if your opponent has sufficient supplies of modern rockets and drones. Yes, and manned aircraft will be obsolete within the next couple of years too, they will just become big drones. Manned aircraft were very, very effective in shooting down drones and cruise missiles (but not ballistic missiles) in the recent Iranian attack on Israel. I wouldn't write them off just yet. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 5, 2024 20:11:29 GMT
lens I've always assumed that Crimea and the 'self governing' Donbass republics and likely more of the Donbass as well are probably never returning to Ukraine and probably shouldn't, re-integrating potentially not on-side populations is the last thing Ukraine needs when it's rebuilding. For me the issue is the south, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast. I had hoped last year's offensive would win that back but alas not. There is a particular moral imperative I think to be able to recover and rebuild the sacrificial city of Mariupol. Like Strasbourg after the Franco-Prussian war the Ukrainians will always pine for it and grieve the injustice of it's loss and horrific destruction. Likewise I think that if Russia had lost the south there would have been the basis for some longer term restoring of relatively normal relations with the West. As long as Russia still occupies Mariupol anything approaching normal relations will never be possible. It takes two to negotiate. As the ISW point out Putin continues to make maximalist demands. A chunk of Ukrainian territory is not an end game for him. Only a Ukraine that is controlled by Russia as a satellite state is satisfactory to his goals of reestablishing what he sees as historic Russian territory. Ukraine has to look like Belarus. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on May 5, 2024 20:51:37 GMT
lens - some analysts are looking ahead and thinking through the collapse of Putin's Russia as the exit strategy, rather than the battlefield retaking of Ukraine's lost territory. I've no idea how likely or not that may be, but with the right weapons, Ukraine has demonstrated the capability to strike very deep inside Russia. They could, if they wished, do an awesome level of damage to, for example, Russian oil exports. To date they haven't, largely, it is suspected, because of western pressure not to provoke a global oil crisis. I suspect we'll see some dramatic attacks inside Russia in the months ahead, and mounting pressure on Putin. But where this ends, your guess is as good as mine. But where's the evidence that mounting pressure is having any effect on Putin alec? - quite the opposite if anything, his control is stronger than ever. Continuous escalation will inevitably lead to a nuclear confrontation. We simply don't know for sure but I think any potential successor would also have to confront the economic issue driving part of the war for Russia - the potential huge gas reserves in the Sea of Azov and need (from Russia's perspective) to control Mariapol and Crimea to be able to extract the gas and transport it; and to ensure it does nor fall into the hands of Ukraine. Ukraine also need this same resource to pay for its own reconstruction and economic development. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 5, 2024 20:54:28 GMT
lens Pretty good summary. I think I agree with every word. It seems that the way of warfare has changed. I know they still need troops to occupy ground but tanks, surface ships and even aircraft are far less useful than they were if your opponent has sufficient supplies of modern rockets and drones. Yes, and manned aircraft will be obsolete within the next couple of years too, they will just become big drones. Yes I meant manned aircraft. The disadvantage of drones is that they are relatively slow (at the moment), but because they are vastly cheaper that doesn't matter so much because hundreds can be sent over at once provided you have the manufacturing capacity or enough money to import loads of them. I'd like to think that we are either manufacturing or ordering from abroad loads of drones of our own, but I very much doubt it. There's an old saying that the British armed forces are always perfectly equipped to fight the last war. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 5, 2024 20:58:27 GMT
lens - some analysts are looking ahead and thinking through the collapse of Putin's Russia as the exit strategy, rather than the battlefield retaking of Ukraine's lost territory. I've no idea how likely or not that may be, but with the right weapons, Ukraine has demonstrated the capability to strike very deep inside Russia. They could, if they wished, do an awesome level of damage to, for example, Russian oil exports. To date they haven't, largely, it is suspected, because of western pressure not to provoke a global oil crisis. I suspect we'll see some dramatic attacks inside Russia in the months ahead, and mounting pressure on Putin. But where this ends, your guess is as good as mine. There was some talk a while ago that if Putin goes he might well be replaced by someone even more warlike. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 5, 2024 21:00:06 GMT
It's really tragic and will have a devastating effect on Russian society for decades to come. The effect on Ukrainian society will be even greater. The population of Russia is 3.5 times that of Ukraine - so as a % the losses are probably about the same. The Ukrainian losses are never published, but the fact that they are struggling to conscript replacements shows they are suffering just as much. Putin would love this war to continue indefinitely. Maybe Trump is the only one who can stop it. Perhaps Ukraine should put more effort into recruiting international volunteers? |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,127
|
Post by domjg on May 5, 2024 21:06:27 GMT
lens I've always assumed that Crimea and the 'self governing' Donbass republics and likely more of the Donbass as well are probably never returning to Ukraine and probably shouldn't, re-integrating potentially not on-side populations is the last thing Ukraine needs when it's rebuilding. For me the issue is the south, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast. I had hoped last year's offensive would win that back but alas not. There is a particular moral imperative I think to be able to recover and rebuild the sacrificial city of Mariupol. Like Strasbourg after the Franco-Prussian war the Ukrainians will always pine for it and grieve the injustice of it's loss and horrific destruction. Likewise I think that if Russia had lost the south there would have been the basis for some longer term restoring of relatively normal relations with the West. As long as Russia still occupies Mariupol anything approaching normal relations will never be possible. While I tend to agree with your analysis, there were pro-Russian protests in Mariupol in 2014 and it's in the Donetsk region, with its industry based on raw materials which were largely obtained from the occupied area, so it will be difficult to re-integrate into Ukraine. Maybe the city got what it wanted then in the massive death and destruction that occurred there early on in the war including the theatre bombing. Watch 20 days in Mariupol and talk about ‘pro Russian protests’. I wonder about you I’m afraid. |
|
