Ukraine

[HighlandDougie]

As usual, an interesting read from Sir Lawrence:

https://samf.substack.com/p/sergei-karaganov-tries-to-find-a?utm_campaign=email-post&r=w1xt&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[JasonPalmer]

The ukraine counter attack has been bogged down, seems the russians know how to defend territory better than taking it, looks like the solution is peace talks and give up the parts russia has annexed then join nato.

[Bella Kemp]

The ukraine counter attack has been bogged down, seems the russians know how to defend territory better than taking it, looks like the solution is peace talks and give up the parts russia has annexed then join nato.

This is exactly right. It's just silly to imagine that Ukraine is going to take Crimea and the Donbas. Mr Putin has the manpower to go on forever, but Ukraine clearly does not and by foolishly cheering them on we are sending more innocent men into the slaughter machine - exactly as Mr Putin hopes. There should be peace talks and Ukraine should defend its current borders. Once they have joined NATO then any Russian invasion beyond Crimea etc. will result in a catastrophe for Putin.

[Historian]

Ukraine does not want to give up part of their sovereign territory which was taken from them illegally. The vast majority of Ukrainians have absolutely no interest in negotiating with Russia at this time.So, do you propose that everyone ceases to aid Ukraine until they see 'sense'? That will not happen: nor should it.

By what possible stretch of the imagination do you feel that it is justified to reward Russia for acts of blatant aggression which goes against international law? Russia is on the way to a defining defeat in Ukraine which will obviously take a long time. They need all the support which we can give them (which, incidentally is less than they currently receive).

Putin may have the manpower in terms of, at best, semi-trained soldiers, but his army is being taken to pieces. Every day the Russians lose hundreds of men, dozens of artillery pieces and many tanks and other armoured vehicles. Their air-force is slowly being whittled away. Their Black Sea fleet has retreated from Sevastopol.

I am sorry if you find this post 'silly' and that it refuses to countenance a 'solution' which allows Russia to take what it has seized violently and illegally. However, you may wish to consider the future consequences if Putin is allowed to win.

[french frank]

[QUOTE ]I’l it, looks like the solution is peace talks and give up the parts russia has annexed then join nato. [/QUOTE]

Yep, Russia/Putin would settle for that, I’m sure, given how his original ambition - take over Kiev and topple the government - has failed. Second best for Russia, non-negotiable for Ukraine.

[HighlandDougie]

Ukraine does not want to give up part of their sovereign territory which was taken from them illegally. The vast majority of Ukrainians have absolutely no interest in negotiating with Russia at this time.So, do you propose that everyone ceases to aid Ukraine until they see 'sense'? That will not happen: nor should it.

By what possible stretch of the imagination do you feel that it is justified to reward Russia for acts of blatant aggression which goes against international law? Russia is on the way to a defining defeat in Ukraine which will obviously take a long time. They need all the support which we can give them (which, incidentally is less than they currently receive).

Putin may have the manpower in terms of, at best, semi-trained soldiers, but his army is being taken to pieces. Every day the Russians lose hundreds of men, dozens of artillery pieces and many tanks and other armoured vehicles. Their air-force is slowly being whittled away. Their Black Sea fleet has retreated from Sevastopol.

I am sorry if you find this post 'silly' and that it refuses to countenance a 'solution' which allows Russia to take what it has seized violently and illegally. However, you may wish to consider the future consequences if Putin is allowed to win.

I could not agree more.

[Joseph K]

Ukraine does not want to give up part of their sovereign territory which was taken from them illegally. The vast majority of Ukrainians have absolutely no interest in negotiating with Russia at this time.So, do you propose that everyone ceases to aid Ukraine until they see 'sense'? That will not happen: nor should it.

By what possible stretch of the imagination do you feel that it is justified to reward Russia for acts of blatant aggression which goes against international law? Russia is on the way to a defining defeat in Ukraine which will obviously take a long time. They need all the support which we can give them (which, incidentally is less than they currently receive).

Putin may have the manpower in terms of, at best, semi-trained soldiers, but his army is being taken to pieces. Every day the Russians lose hundreds of men, dozens of artillery pieces and many tanks and other armoured vehicles. Their air-force is slowly being whittled away. Their Black Sea fleet has retreated from Sevastopol.

I am sorry if you find this post 'silly' and that it refuses to countenance a 'solution' which allows Russia to take what it has seized violently and illegally. However, you may wish to consider the future consequences if Putin is allowed to win.

The US (and UK) has 'won' or done aggressive illegal things with impunity before, and continues to support regimes that have done so. With what consequences? How do you see this ending, what does a Putin defeat look like to you?

[teamsaint]

This is exactly right. It's just silly to imagine that Ukraine is going to take Crimea and the Donbas. Mr Putin has the manpower to go on forever, but Ukraine clearly does not and by foolishly cheering them on we are sending more innocent men into the slaughter machine - exactly as Mr Putin hopes. There should be peace talks and Ukraine should defend its current borders. Once they have joined NATO then any Russian invasion beyond Crimea etc. will result in a catastrophe for Putin.

I’m not actually sure that either side has the manpower to go on forever. I would certainly want to check out the demographics and effects of the war on available manpower.

[Dave2002]

This is exactly right. It's just silly to imagine that Ukraine is going to take Crimea and the Donbas. Mr Putin has the manpower to go on forever, but Ukraine clearly does not and by foolishly cheering them on we are sending more innocent men into the slaughter machine - exactly as Mr Putin hopes. There should be peace talks and Ukraine should defend its current borders. Once they have joined NATO then any Russian invasion beyond Crimea etc. will result in a catastrophe for Putin.

Things are currently - it seems - evenly balanced - so any outcome is still possible. It is not totally unbelievable that Ukraine could stave off continued Russian assaults and even take back Crimea. In the past Finland repelled Russian ingressions successfully - though it took a long while, and FInland has far fewer people than Ukraine. Clearly Russia still has many more people, but the evidence so far is that not all of them really want to fight, and up to now they haven't been very good at it. Sadly the Russian leadership seems to see its people as disposable.

I don't think I'd want to bet either way on an eventual outcome, but I think it's far too early to rule out any possibility, even if at present there may be an almost stalemate situation. If the Ukrainians want to continue fighting, as they seem to do, then telling them they shouldn't seems wrong, though telling them they should if the fight is really hopeless would perhaps also be wrong.

[french frank]

what does a Putin defeat look like to you?

I wonder that too.

[Petrushka]

What does a Putin defeat look like to you?

Forget any notion of Ukraine reaching the gates of Moscow, that will not happen. A Putin defeat will come about when Ukraine has sufficiently degraded his armed forces in such a way that the Russians are unable to continue the war. This can be achieved by destroying logistics, that is the ability of Russia to feed, clothe and arm their forces. This is evidently what Ukraine is trying to do.

If Putin cannot feed, clothe or arm his military then his ability to prosecute the war will, hopefully, be sufficient to see his regime so weakened that he will be overthrown. Victory in war is not necessarily about reclaiming territory.

This is my two'penn'orth contribution anyway.

[Historian]

How do you see this ending, what does a Putin defeat look like to you?

Very sorry not to have replied before: it's a very good question. I will restrict myself to describing some possible alternatives portraying a possible military defeat for Putin.

In an ideal world, Mr. Putin would see sense tomorrow (or at least in the next few days), declare 'victory' and start to retreat from all areas of Ukraine back to within Russia's borders. This would be followed by talks, probably overseen by a third party, resulting in an end to all hostilities.

That will not happen, sadly.

Next scenario: faced with the slow but certain destruction of his armed forces (and therefore the basis of his power) by the collapse of the southern front in Zaporizhia, Putin eventually decides to cut his losses (say Spring 2024) and pull back to the neck of Crimea and the other areas in the Donbas taken illegally in 2014 (when the conflict effectively began). This would be the product of much hard fighting and heavy casualties. However, faced with the prospect of a catastrophic military defeat, he then agrees to a ceasefire on the basis of a subsequent withdrawal within Russia's pre-war borders. A variation on this would be to abandon Crimea - which would be untenable once Ukraine took back Melitopol, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast - and hold on to the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk 'republics'. Ukraine might then decide that there was enough regained to agree to negotiations. This seems unlikely to me but it's a possibility.

Most likely, in my moderately informed opinion, is a continued long struggle well into 2024 at least, if not 2025 (assuming sufficient military/financial etc. support from the US and European supporters) in which Putin's army continues to see its equipment slowly destroyed. (It is true that Russia has an overall manpower advantage in theory, but that's not going to save them when they have run out of artillery and armoured vehicles, not to mention fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters.) The relatively successful Russian defence lines of this summer will not be able to be duplicated indefinitely as the minefields and field defences require effective artillery and armoured support. Eventually the Russians will be forced to retreat - how fast depends to some extent on how strongly they have fortified the defences behind the tough 'crust' which the Ukrainians have been slowly breaking up around Robotyne (among other places). Tokmak and other key logistic centres will fall, followed by Melitopol, Mariupol and the northern coast of the Sea of Azov.

Russia will then have a choice of trying to hold on to the Crimea or creating a new defensive line to protect the Donbas areas and keep hold of them. Assuming that the supporters of Ukraine remain resolute I don't see how Russia could keep Crimea. In theory they might have a better chance of retaining the areas in south-east Ukraine.

I hope that this makes some sense, albeit in a slightly limited way. My apologies for not having looked at the 'bigger picture' i.e. what happens to Putin and Russia once they have been defeated in Ukraine.

[Historian]

Forget any notion of Ukraine reaching the gates of Moscow, that will not happen. A Putin defeat will come about when Ukraine has sufficiently degraded his armed forces in such a way that the Russians are unable to continue the war. This can be achieved by destroying logistics, that is the ability of Russia to feed, clothe and arm their forces. This is evidently what Ukraine is trying to do.

If Putin cannot feed, clothe or arm his military then his ability to prosecute the war will, hopefully, be sufficient to see his regime so weakened that he will be overthrown. Victory in war is not necessarily about reclaiming territory.

This is my two'penn'orth contribution anyway.

This seems very convincing to me. I would add that Ukraine is also destroying Russia's ability to continue to fight by destroying artillery, armoured vehicles etc. as well as trained soldiers in great numbers.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Very sorry not to have replied before: it's a very good question. I will restrict myself to describing some possible alternatives portraying a possible military defeat for Putin.

In an ideal world, Mr. Putin would see sense tomorrow (or at least in the next few days), declare 'victory' and start to retreat from all areas of Ukraine back to within Russia's borders. This would be followed by talks, probably overseen by a third party, resulting in an end to all hostilities.

That will not happen, sadly.

Next scenario: faced with the slow but certain destruction of his armed forces (and therefore the basis of his power) by the collapse of the southern front in Zaporizhia, Putin eventually decides to cut his losses (say Spring 2024) and pull back to the neck of Crimea and the other areas in the Donbas taken illegally in 2014 (when the conflict effectively began). This would be the product of much hard fighting and heavy casualties. However, faced with the prospect of a catastrophic military defeat, he then agrees to a ceasefire on the basis of a subsequent withdrawal within Russia's pre-war borders. A variation on this would be to abandon Crimea - which would be untenable once Ukraine took back Melitopol, Mariupol and the Azov sea coast - and hold on to the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk 'republics'. Ukraine might then decide that there was enough regained to agree to negotiations. This seems unlikely to me but it's a possibility.

Most likely, in my moderately informed opinion, is a continued long struggle well into 2024 at least, if not 2025 (assuming sufficient military/financial etc. support from the US and European supporters) in which Putin's army continues to see its equipment slowly destroyed. (It is true that Russia has an overall manpower advantage in theory, but that's not going to save them when they have run out of artillery and armoured vehicles, not to mention fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters.) The relatively successful Russian defence lines of this summer will not be able to be duplicated indefinitely as the minefields and field defences require effective artillery and armoured support. Eventually the Russians will be forced to retreat - how fast depends to some extent on how strongly they have fortified the defences behind the tough 'crust' which the Ukrainians have been slowly breaking up around Robotyne (among other places). Tokmak and other key logistic centres will fall, followed by Melitopol, Mariupol and the northern coast of the Sea of Azov.

Russia will then have a choice of trying to hold on to the Crimea or creating a new defensive line to protect the Donbas areas and keep hold of them. Assuming that the supporters of Ukraine remain resolute I don't see how Russia could keep Crimea. In theory they might have a better chance of retaining the areas in south-east Ukraine.

I hope that this makes some sense, albeit in a slightly limited way. My apologies for not having looked at the 'bigger picture' i.e. what happens to Putin and Russia once they have been defeated in Ukraine.

Interesting . The impression one gets from the papers is that the Ukraine army is having trouble breaching well prepared Russia defences and that Putin is holding on for a Trump re-election and a decline in US support . I’ve been struggling to find a single broadsheet Pundit predicting significant Ukrainian gains. You seem much more positive . In these wars of attrition sudden collapse is always a distinct possibility. Russian infantry morale must be very low - after a while seeing your mates getting killed in a country you don’t get care much about gets to you.

[Historian]

Been quite a bit since anything was posted - rather like the rest of the media Ukraine has been placed here in the forget about it pile.

You are quite right: I don't like obtruding but will post more often. Thank you to you and others for keeping the discussions going with a variety of different ideas and viewpoints.