Reading between the Russian lines in Ukraine

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

Back when Russia was amassing troops in preparation for their attack on Ukraine, I posted that their objective was to secure the territories taken in 2014 (from an international legal standpoint) and assure a buffer between Russia and Europe.

Then they invaded and it seemed like they were going for the whole enchilada - requiring Ukraine as a step towards further expansion.

News of the war has been filtered by both governments and media on both sides of the conflict as well as cheerleading nations so getting an unbiased view has been problematic.

Anyway, I came across a couple of tidbits this morning:

The map on this story showing the extent of the Russian troop advance:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/29/europe/ukraine-war-russia-occ…

The following statements for the link here:

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-ne…

Russian forces are largely stalled in several parts of Ukraine, including around Chernihiv, Mykolaiv and Kharkiv, according to a senior US defense official. Troops have “made no progress in moving towards Kyiv,” though fighting continues on the outskirts of the capital.

Russian forces have consolidated control around the southeastern port city of Mariupol, with evacuation corridors largely under their control, according to the city’s mayor. Weeks of bombardment have devastated the city and killed an unknown number of civilians. Those who remain are living without heat, electricity or water. “We are in the hands of the occupiers,” the mayor said Monday, calling for a complete evacuation of all residents.

Russian control of the Mariupol area is important to them to protect Crimea from future potential attack from the north and west - as is control of the coast of the Sea of Azov. There is now a Russian-controlled buffer along the boarder as a fait accompli. The words “advance stalled”, while intending to show that Ukrainian resistance has been successful in stopping Russia’s advance may merely mean that Russia has achieved its goals in both taking the territory it desired as well as demonstrating to Ukraine the importance of not taking to strong an anti-Russia tilt as Russian threats are not empty threats.

I suspect that Russia’s goals during the upcoming negotiations will be to have Ukraine formally swear to neutrality, concede Russia’s annexation of Crimea and provide “special status” (demilitarization at a minimum - if not complete legal separation from) to the buffer zone Russia currently controls.

A major question which will remain is the status of the West’s sanctions as well as how the acrimonious environment will be ratcheted down.

Jeff

9 Likes
2

A major question which will remain is the status of the West’s sanctions as well as how the acrimonious environment will be ratcheted down.

Jeff,

You are making this sound like a business negotiation. Would you in good faith negotiate a multi billion deal with Putin?

Russia has several times over call this ‘phase one’. Putin means that.

If this were the end of Ukrainian war what is next on Putin’s plate? Because there most certainly are several things next.

Putin wants from Ukraine what a free nation can not entertain. The message from Kviv…“go pound sand”.

The reality is you have listed partial goals for Putin. He wanted and continues to want far more.

Again “the peace in our time” moment has long past.

The only solution is Putin’s death. He certainly knows that. He is not actually paranoid. He has cornered himself against his own military command and oligarchs. If he uses tactical nukes or biologicals and chemicals the US/NATO will enter this and see to his end. How that is done directly at him might be very creative. If he is gone Russia surrenders. Ukraine enters NATO. Putin’s life is not worth the life of one pregnant woman in Kviv.

4 Likes
3

Jeff,

Something else for you to ponder. While you are discussing a business negotiation as a solution with Russia, Putin is not a businessman at all. He is a thief, he is a demagogue, he is a murderer, etc…you name the crime he is the criminal.

Any scrap of paper with him as a ‘deal’ will not last all of two months. There is no need to think of Reagan trust but verify. Putin will flaunt that he can not be trusted or verified after signing whatever you want.

2 Likes
4

Leap1,

Do not underestimate the ability of Russia to continue to pound Ukraine’s cities to rubble (as they have demonstrated they can and are willing to). Do not underestimate the stress on a country who has not got 15% of its population abroad - or that placed on other nations.

In a war of attrition, though at a substantial cost, Russia will win.

So, a deal will be made. It will not give either side everything they desire, but I’m guessing will give Russia some benefit on the ground in return for a guaranty that there will not be a repeat performance.

And yes, to Putin, this is simply a form of physical negotiation, not far removed from a business deal. To Ukraine, the site of the conflict, sentiments will differ. This attitude is no different than say, a builder of condominiums and hotels who offers contractors $.50 on the dollar and tells them that if they don’t take the deal they can sue his firm and be tied up bleeding cash in the courts for years. Different venue, but same attitude.

Jeff

4 Likes
5

I suspect that Russia’s goals during the upcoming negotiations will be to have Ukraine formally swear to neutrality, concede Russia’s annexation of Crimea and provide “special status” (demilitarization at a minimum - if not complete legal separation from) to the buffer zone Russia currently controls.

And, once Ukraine has committed to neutrality, again, and made other concessions to mollify Putin, what is there to prevent Putin coming back in a couple years and taking another slice?

Conceding Crimea and the Donbas, in exchange for immediate Ukrainian membership in NATO, would have some staying power, because NATO membership preempts Putin coming back, like a blackmailer, and demanding more.

Recall, the agreement in 94 had the US, UK and Russia guaranteeing Ukrainian territorial integrity. That lasted ten years, before Putin broke it, and the UK and US did nothing.

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

1:Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.[24]

2:Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine.

3:Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine to influence their politics.

4:Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.

5:Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine.
Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit…

The heavy push in Ukraine to join NATO came after the seizure of Crimea, because Ukraine knew the only defense against Putin is NATO.

According to polls conducted between 2005 and 2013, Ukrainian public support of NATO membership remained low. However, since the Russo-Ukrainian War and Annexation of Crimea, public support for Ukrainian membership in NATO has risen greatly. Since June 2014, polls showed that about 50% of those asked supported Ukrainian NATO membership. Some 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO, according to a June 2017 poll by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, compared to 28% support in 2012 when Yanukovych was in power.[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations…

Steve

7 Likes
6

I suspect that Russia’s goals during the upcoming negotiations will be to have Ukraine formally swear to neutrality, concede Russia’s annexation of Crimea and provide “special status” (demilitarization at a minimum - if not complete legal separation from) to the buffer zone Russia currently controls.

A major question which will remain is the status of the West’s sanctions as well as how the acrimonious environment will be ratcheted down.

Jeff

=======================================================================

You are mistaken to think Ukraine will “formally wear to neutrality, concede Russia’s annexation of Crimea and provide “special status” (demilitarization at a minimum - if not complete legal separation from) to the buffer zone Russia currently controls.” that may be Russia’s goal but it will never happen. The Ukrainians would rather die than submit to Russians and give up their lands and freedom.

The West’s sanctions will not be ratcheted down until the Russia withdraws all their troops from Ukraine and pays for war crimes and destruction.

The West needs to strangle Russia government till it withers and dies. Putin should never be allowed to remain as a leader of Russia.

Jaak

17 Likes
7

Do not underestimate the ability of Russia to continue to pound Ukraine’s cities to rubble (as they have demonstrated they can and are willing to). Do not underestimate the stress on a country who has not got 15% of its population abroad - or that placed on other nations.

In a war of attrition, though at a substantial cost, Russia will win.

So, a deal will be made. It will not give either side everything they desire, but I’m guessing will give Russia some benefit on the ground in return for a guaranty that there will not be a repeat performance.

==================================================================

You do not understand the resolve of the Ukrainians and the European Nations that will not tolerate Russia gaining any territory in Ukraine. This war will escalate if the Ukrainians start to lose badly. Negotiating with Russians is like negotiating with a pit bull and the dog needs to be neutralized.

Jaak

3 Likes
8

…but I’m guessing will give Russia some benefit on the ground in return for a guaranty that there will not be a repeat performance.

Guaranty? Really? As if Putin’s guaranty would mean anything at all, especially now as the Ukrainians watch their previous “guaranty” go down in death and destruction.

Pete

6 Likes
9

Jeff,

You are thinking Putin wants a deal. That is not so.

Our Pentagon is saying Putin is moving his forces during this time to be more strategic in how he fights this war. That is all that is really happening.

Looking at the map Putin will fight in the east. He has some success in the south he will try to expand on and drive up to the north from there.

If Putin were ever serious about peace I’d be totally surprised.

2 Likes
10

“This war will escalate if the Ukrainians start to lose badly.”

I hope not and if you would live in Europe YOU would have a different attitude. Or maybe not.

Now on TV:

"Minister of the Economy Robert Habeck has activated the early warning stage of the so-called emergency gas plan. “There are currently no supply bottlenecks,” the Green politician announced. “Nevertheless, we must increase precautionary measures.”

I’m afraid that if the war doesn’t end soon, parts of Ukraine will become a second Chechnya.
Which means a huge humanitarian tragedy, millions of refugies, destroyed lives and an uncertain future.

My heart goes to all those who lost everything they had and have to endure such a terrible fate and I hope the war will not escalate anymore. Not here in Europe and nowhere else in the world where innocent people (including the US soldiers) have to die for some absurd interests.

You should be aware that if the war will escalate, no matter where you live (in the US), you and your family might be in DANGER.

Peace is the word, only Peace is the future!

2 Likes
11

I hope the war will not escalate anymore. Not here in Europe and nowhere else in the world where innocent people (including the US soldiers) have to die for some absurd interests.

==========================================================

Freedom from being invaded, killed, raped and pillaged are not absurd interests.

Remember:

Was the American revolution about absurd interests?

Was the French revolution about absurd interests?

Was the Finnish - Russian war of 1939 about absurd interests by Finland?

Was the German invasions of WWII about absurd interests for all the countries fighting the Germans?

Was the Russian invasions of WWII about absurd interests for all the countries fighting the Russians?

Was the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor about absurd interests of the USA?

I could go on for hours …

Jaak

3 Likes
12

Do not underestimate the ability of Russia to continue to pound Ukraine’s cities to rubble (as they have demonstrated they can and are willing to). Do not underestimate the stress on a country who has not got 15% of its population abroad - or that placed on other nations.

In a war of attrition, though at a substantial cost, Russia will win.

So, a deal will be made. It will not give either side everything they desire, but I’m guessing will give Russia some benefit on the ground in return for a guaranty that there will not be a repeat performance.

I’m not so sure. After WWI, the Italian military theorist Giulio Douhet posited that strategic bombing would cause the enemy’s morale to collapse, and hence lead to surrender. These principles were adopted by the US and UK in WWII and German and Japanese cities were bombed extensively, some to near total destruction. For example, on March 7 1945 the US fired bombed Tokyo and killed an estimated 300,000 civilians. However, the predicted collapse of morale never happened.

So, I’m skeptical Russia can bomb Ukraine into concessions. On the flip side, Russia has lost significant amounts of personnel and equipment. Already there are reports Russia is having difficulty manufacturing new equipment because of lack of key parts due to western sanctions. We all seen the photos and videos of abandoned Russian equipment. There are a lot of reasons for this, one is the equipment probably just broke due to lack of maintenance. We’ve also seen trucks camouflaged with branches instead of netting and rations that expired in 2002. It doesn’t appear the Russian equipment bench is very deep.

Ukraine has taken significant losses too, but has no such supply problems because it is being supplied by the west. Ukraine’s army has doubled in size from the start of the year to the point where there aren’t enough weapons to equip everyone. That condition won’t last for long. The US announced another $500 million aid package just today. As Russia gets weaker, Ukraine gets stronger.

The wildcard is that Putin needs a face-saving victory and is likely to continue the war until he gets one.

12 Likes
13

The wildcard is that Putin needs a face-saving victory and is likely to continue the war until he gets one.

That is only a wildcard because it is so weird. Any victory just leads to the next battle the next war. The victory is meaningless no matter how he propagandizes it in Russia. It is droll.

He wont simply go home. In defeat Putin wont go home.

The Ukrainians are making a good case for getting tanks. Their spokes people have to be careful to say they wont use them on Russian soil. As the Irish would say, “a wink is as good as a nod to a blindman”.

1 Like
14

Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature.

…

… strategic bombing would cause the enemy’s morale to collapse, and hence lead to surrender. These principles were adopted by the US and UK in WWII and German and Japanese cities were bombed extensively, some to near total destruction. For example, on March 7 1945 the US fired bombed Tokyo and killed an estimated 300,000 civilians. However, the predicted collapse of morale never happened.

The simple truth was that neither the German nor the Japanese civilian populations had any say in it. They were expected to die bravely while in the Japanese case the women and kids would be trying to take at least one allied soldier with them using a bamboo stick. Old men and young teens in Germany were handed a panzerfaust and sent up against Allied tanks.

https://g.co/kgs/z5Yeca

Meanwhile the US commander of the strategic bombing of Japan once commented that if the US lost the war he would be tried for War Crimes.

Anymouse

1 Like
15

The wildcard is that Putin needs a face-saving victory and is likely to continue the war until he gets one.

Bret Stephens has an interesting take in today’s NYT.

What if Putin didn’t miscalculate?

Suppose for a moment that Putin never intended to conquer all of Ukraine: that, from the beginning, his real targets were the energy riches of Ukraine’s east, which contain Europe’s second-largest known reserves of natural gas (after Norway’s).

Combine that with Russia’s previous territorial seizures in Crimea (which has huge offshore energy fields) and the eastern provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk (which contain part of an enormous shale-gas field), as well as Putin’s bid to control most or all of Ukraine’s coastline, and the shape of Putin’s ambitions become clear. He’s less interested in reuniting the Russian-speaking world than he is in securing Russia’s energy dominance.

“Under the guise of an invasion, Putin is executing an enormous heist,” said Canadian energy expert David Knight Legg. As for what’s left of a mostly landlocked Ukraine, it will likely become a welfare case for the West,
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/opinion/ukraine-war-putin…

He notes that the conflict in Crimea in 2014 went as badly at first, then Putin “regrouped” and destroyed the cities from afar using artillery and air power. Eventually he got the best and left the worst behind.

Full article at the link, and worth reading, even if his theory is wrong.

14 Likes
16

He notes that the conflict in Crimea in 2014 went as badly at first, then Putin “regrouped” and destroyed the cities from afar using artillery and air power. Eventually he got the best and left the worst behind.

Full article at the link, and worth reading, even if his theory is wrong.

I like Bret Stephens, but in this case he’s wrong. Let’s look at what has happened/is happening. I’ll just do it in bullet points in no order:

–Russian central bank’s assets are frozen

–Sanctions mean little new investment from the West, and sanctions could take years to unwind

–The EU and Germany in particular have announced massive investments in decarbonization.

–The EU and Germany in particular have announced plans for re-arming, and increasing military cooperation and capabilities.

–The EU announced plans to end all Russian oil and gas contracts by 2027. Even if Putin can develop the Odesa gas fields without western help, he won’t have handy customers.

–Finland and Sweden are discussing joining NATO.

–Ukraine is in talks to join the EU, which will further pull Ukraine out of Russian influence.

–The vaunted Russian army looks pretty weak.

–Whiz-bang western military hardware like NLAWs and Javelins seem extra fearsome.

–China seems lukewarm about giving Russia a hand. Possibly looking to see which way the winds are blowing before taking sides.

–The oligarchs who help keep Putin in power might just value their former lifestyles more than they value Putin.

There is no scenario where Putin comes out ahead at this point. Putin didn’t just miscalculate. Putin screwed the pooch.

And if I may, I’d like to take another couple swings at my favorite dead horse: Have you seen the price of gas at the pump lately? That’s because Putin’s little adventure has caused a global oil supply disruption (or at least global uncertainty) and congratulations! We all get to pay for it. It doesn’t matter that the US is oil independent. Your wallet still suffers. The EU got snookered by the promise of cheap Russian oil and gas. Turns out: Not so cheap at all. And it won’t look cheap the next time we get snookered either. Oil dependency is a geopolitical nightmare.

16 Likes
17

Putin miscalculated Ukrainian resolve and western resolve.

Frankly we are using the war as a pretext for a cold war as we should. That means the west regrouping economically against Russia and China. We are the big winners. Let’s take Ukraine with us. Putin’s corpse would be a smaller price to pay.

2 Likes
18

Meanwhile the US commander of the strategic bombing of Japan once commented that if the US lost the war he would be tried for War Crimes.

iirc, that was Curtis LeMay. Arthur Harris is said to have said something similar.

Steve

1 Like
19

Arthur Harris is said to have said something similar.

I would be very surprised if that were true. Harris remained unapologetic throughout the war and when a clever propaganda coup*** by Joseph Goebbels turned the world press against the bombing he and his crews continued right up until the end.

*** - After the Dresden raid by the USAF and RAF the chief of police showed Goebbels a report that ~25,000 civilians had been killed. Goebbels added a zero at the end.

When the subject of city bombing came up in discussion while I lived in Germany I would remind people that the Brits didn’t invent city bombing … Germany did … the Brits merely perfected it.

In WWII there were 384,000 soldiers killed in combat, but a higher civilian death toll (70,000, as opposed to 2,000 in WWI), largely due to German bombing raids during the Blitz: 40,000 civilians died in the seven-month period between September 1940 and May 1941, almost half of them in London.

Anymouse

2 Likes
20

iirc, that was Curtis LeMay. Arthur Harris is said to have said something similar.

The winners get to make the rules – and to write the history.

“History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.”
WINSTON CHURCHILL

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/a1350e4e72b3449a839ce48…

The Captain