Medium Ukraine (Politics)

[Mick Harper]

As you may have noticed I have finished reposting my Saving The World Medium stories. Since I have found the process mildly useful and wholly therapeutic I intend doing the same now with my Ukraine stories. This is for my benefit rather than yours but you are free to complain to the AEL people. Or comment waspishly here.

As to the stories themselves, it is interesting (to me) finding out how relevant or irrelevant my subject choices were and how accurate my predictions turned out to be. No smirking at the back.

This one is about a Russian nationalist being blown up by a fan who presented him with a bust (with a bomb inside). Not a problem I suffer from very much.
----------

Who Killed Vladlen Tatarsky? Apr 4, 2023
Blowing up Blowhards

It is amazing how talking heads — I hope I can use the phrase in this context without irony — complicate things in pursuit of their various agendas. The chief of which, I suppose, is to be asked to appear as a talking head which you do by casting the net as widely as possible.

Speaking as a writing head, I have to say it is relatively straightforward working out who was responsible for killing Tatarsky by applying Sherlock Holmes’ principle: ‘When all other possibilities are eliminated...’ A bust of the intended victim is not a vehicle of choice for anybody experienced in the ways of bombs.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Vladlen Tatarsky was a successful Milliblogger who was a mouthpiece for Wagner and Prighozhin. His assassination took place on 2nd April 2023.

On 23 August 2023, an Embraer Legacy 600 business jet with ten people on board crashed near Kuzhenkino in Tver Oblast after departing Moscow. Among the victims were Yevgeny Prigozhin, Dmitry Utkin and Valery Chekalov (the leadership of Wagner Group).

Wagner Group was then administratively dismantled over the next year.

Post facto, I would hazard a guess that someone (Who?) held a grudge against Wagner. (Why?)

Although a run of very bad luck, cannot be ruled out........

[Mick Harper]

[Mick Harper]

No, not Tatarsky, someone else. Who, by the way I turned out to be correct about (now I've looked it up). He was killed well before the Putin/ Prigozhin bust-up and Darya Trepova is serving twenty-seven years. Don't listen to Wiley about this, Wiley.
---------------

We won’t be hearing from him again May 31, 2023

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

I think you're getting your Kremlinology all wrong. State killings of Russian citizens is quite a big deal. It isn't routine policy, it's more an ultimate sanction. The idea that Putin would have a well-known supporter of the war killed is in itself passing strange but to do so just because he was expressing support for policies which were, at the time, being widely canvassed I find preposterous.

And can you really picture Putin sanctioning such a bizarre, such a dangerous and such a doubtfully effective manner of execution?

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

I am interested--from an AE perspective--with your style of argument. You have been presented with two choices:

The first is a sequence of events filmed in real time and copiously witnessed i.e. a young woman with anti-war sentiments carried a bust of Tatarsky into a venue in which he was giving a public talk, gave it to Tatarsky, who was blown up by it, whereupon the woman was arrested and sentenced to a long term of imprisonment.

The second is that all the above happened -- or was made to seem to have happened -- but that Putin orchestrated it.

AE says the first is to be preferred on Okhamite grounds unless there are clear reasons why it should not be. You have rejected it. Using arguments that amount to 'it is possible' you have advanced a case that, as it happens, coincides with what makes you happy. You appear to be unshakeable in your opinion.

I do not ask you to change your mind. I do ask you to accept you are breaking AE rules. Which of course you are entitled to do.

[Mick Harper]

In the days when Ukraine was winning and was assumed to have a choice.
--------------

Jaw-Jaw will eventually replace War-War September 28, 2023
Learning to Dance the Military Two-Step

Three things about the Ukraine War everyone can probably agree on:

1. Ukraine has consistently had the better of the fighting, but
2. Ukraine won’t be able to drive the Russians out of every last square metre of Ukrainian territory, which means
3. At some stage Ukraine will have to agree peace terms with Russia.

It is probably true that the longer Ukraine fights, the better the terms it will get, so one strategy is just to continue fighting until, essentially, Russia cries Uncle. This school of thought has to ask itself two questions:

1. Will the Ukrainian population and NATO accept this strategy? They have done so thus far, they show no signs of weakening at present, but neither will do so indefinitely. Nor should they.

2. Will the Russians ever give up? They have not done so thus far, they show no signs of weakening at present but, crucially, they don’t answer to either their own population or to foreign backers. They really can fight this war indefinitely. Which is not to say they will.

There is a recent example of this exact situation, the Korean War. After success for the North Koreans, then success for the Americans, then success for the Chinese, then stabilisation of the front by the Americans and the South Koreans, everyone was asking, “What now?” Nobody could answer that question.

Both sides knew they couldn’t drive the other out. Both sides knew the final peace would be roughly the status quo ante. Both sides knew if they asked for peace they would be perceived to be the losers of the war.

So they just fought on. I don’t know how the Korean War was brought to an end. Nobody does, the details are still shrouded in mystery. But whatever they were, they should be dusted off to give us some clues for ending this one.

[Mick Harper]

This got me barrel loads of flak but it has proved to be spot on.
---------------

I hate to say it but Russia has already won October 1, 2023

You won’t have noticed this because of the constant bulletins telling of Ukrainian successes coupled with no less regular reports that Russia is lurching from one existential crisis to another.

Occasionally you may hear about ‘disappointing gains in the summer offensive’ followed by a government spokesperson explaining why progress is slow but won’t be as soon as

* such-and-such bit of kit has been introduced
* some tactical novelty has been put into operation
* an untapped reserve has been shifted from somewhere to somewhere.

Government spokespersons have been saying ‘it will be all over by Christmas’ since before there were Christmases. They are seldom right for a simple reason: what else can they say?

“Dear citizens, progress is slow because our forces have a rough parity with their forces. If they weren’t our progress would not be slow, it would be either non-existent (because their forces are stronger) or the offensive would have worked by now (because our forces are stronger). So there will have to be another offensive next year. There is the possibility the enemy will sue for peace by Christmas but since they have just observed we can only make slow progress, there is no reason why they would. Every country prefers being pushed back to losing a war.”

[Mick Harper]

We might as well use this thread for all Ukraine news so here's some snippets I gleaned

* Ukraine drones now have the capability to enter Russian infantry trenches, fly along them, turn corners and inspect pretty much every square inch of them.

* But generally Russia has the edge in drone technology thanks to their mastery of fibre optic guidance. It's a pretty weird concept: as the drone takes off it unspools the fibre attached to Drone HQ so the operator can control it without fear of jamming. Ukraine recently droned the factory making the fibre but they keep on coming.

* Very oddly neither country uses general conscription to fill their armies. Ukraine won't--and this still astonishes me--call up young men, preferring more mature types. Since Russia is only fighting a 'special military operation' it cannot use conscripts, preferring to spend an arm and a leg persuading people to die for their country. There is a lot of rumours going round this is about to change and general conscription is to be introduced.

* Whether this is related to news that Russia intends to import a million Indians to fill the gaps in the labour force isn't clear. (It isn't clear they are going to import the Indians but the information is sort of credible.)

* The Russian company best known for turning out cuddly toys has just overtaken Gazprom, the energy gigantico, in market capitalisation. Says it all.

[Mick Harper]

For quite a long time the Ukraine War was exciting. Not only did we not know who would win, we didn't know how they would win. It was a war of movement and innovation. People kept believing this long after it wasn't true. People still believe it.
---------------

Don’t Kid Yourself About Ukraine January 3, 2024
Where you’re at is where you’re at.

[Mick Harper]

What are we to make of Zelensky? We can't know until the memoirs come out but he seems right up there among wartime leaders. Not something you could say about Putin.

But Putin is at least 'the leader'. Is Zelensky? Should he be given the credit for Ukrainian drone production currently running at 200,000 a month? For re-organising drone forces into a central command back in March? For stopping Russian offensives in their tracks by targeting the build-up behind the lines with drones?

[Mick Harper]

An attempt to inject some AE into the Ukraine debate. Without, in my judgement, much success.
-------------

What are the odds, Ukraine or Russia? January 18, 2024
Bet on the favourite, not your favourite.

I don’t keep myself up to date on all the ins-and-outs of the Ukraine War but I do have a considerable grasp of wars in general. This is in contrast to most observers of the Ukraine War who know everything about the ins-and-out but, so far as I can see, have little grasp of wars in general. Perhaps we can have a bit of melding-of-minds here.

The first thing to note about wars is that the Big Battalions always win. True, it can be difficult to know at the outset who the Big Battalions are. (I write about this more fully here: https://medium.com/@mickxharper/up-for-the-cup-56cc7f9b831a.)

Bringing matters up to date, I can point to the problems the Americans had in Vietnam and the Israelis are having in Gaza. They confused having bigger and better weapons with bigger and better resolve.

[Mick Harper]

A surprisingly accurate prediction that may turn out to be inaccurate.
-----------------

Ukraine: Weighing the Outcomes January 20, 2024

The possible outcomes of the Ukrainian War are:
1. Ukraine collapses, war ends
2. Ukraine re-occupies all Ukrainian territory, war ends
3. Russia collapses, war ends
4. Combatants agree peace terms, war ends.

There is no present indication of (1) happening. If anything, the reverse appears to be the case. However, there is the long term possibility that the Ukrainian people will become sufficiently averse to living in wartime conditions they will force — or overthrow — their government to accept whatever peace terms the Russians are prepared to offer, short of (1). There is also the possibility that Russia occupies the whole of Ukraine and achieves (1).

There is no present indication of (2) happening. If anything, the reverse appears to be the case. After containing the Ukrainian summer offensive, Russia is making small local gains. There is also the possibility that even if the Russians were forced out of the whole of Ukraine (including Crimea) they would not make peace.

Ukraine, and their foreign backers, understand all this well enough. In their public statements — and in their practical policies — they are maintaining that (2) is the goal they are pursuing. What they are saying in private is not known but, given the leakiness of western governments, we can be reasonably confident they are saying it in private as well.

However, from quite early on in the war, it was recognised on the Ukrainian side their best hope was (3). There were even strong indications that it might happen. These hopes have not been realised thus far. If anything, the reverse appears to be the case. A conclusion strengthened by an analysis of Russian history: Russia sometimes ‘collapses’ but only as the result of a war, not during it.

This would appear to leave only (4). The problem here is that if either side proceeds on the basis of it, the other side will recognise it to be a sign of weakness (because it is) and will either keep on fighting or propose unacceptable peace terms. Looked at objectively, this is the worst possible outcome because it will lead either to an indefinite state of war or an unacceptable peace that will lead to a de facto indefinite state of war.

If the only feasible outcome of the Ukraine War is also the worst possible outcome, what is to best way forward? Curiously it is to elect Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States. His declared (and on past form, his actual) policy is to end support for Ukraine. Without American backing, Ukraine will have to seek an end to the war on whatever terms Russia is prepared to accept. Since Ukraine will keep on fighting — with or without foreign assistance — to prevent (1), Russia will be obliged to accept (4) because otherwise there is the possibility of (3).

(2) of course will not be on the table.