Currently the fighting is frenetic & fierce as both sides attempt to move the front lines as peace settlement looms. But little territory changes hands.
Russia cannot take over Ukraine. Nor can Ukraine eject Russia.
No EU/NATO forces in Ukraine unless a peace accord is signed.
Methinks it behooves both sides to make the best deal they can before collapse occurs.
the government will have no choice but to conscript women
Russia is also having problems with obtaining more soldiers. Both sides are having problems with determining how many casualties there have been. Ukraine states that the Russians have suffered 200,000 dead and about 600,000 wounded. At the same time Ukraine says its own losses have been 50,000 dead, 60,000 missing, 9,000 captured and 400,000 wounded. Both sides avoid discussing or releasing data on deserters and those who actively avoid military service. Yet one of the realities for both sides is the lack of new soldiers and the growing numbers of desertions and those evading military service.
Russia & Ukraine have been bled dry of manpower & economically.
Victory for the West as Russia is moved closer to economic & demographic ruin at no cost to the West. Time to move onto China. Can China be enticed to a Taiwan invasion?
Irrational. If the EU decides to put troops into Ukraine, it will be because they believe it is in their best interests. Putin’s continuous bloviating can (and should) be ignored.
Apparently, Ukraine signing over it’s minerals to the US would not change anything. No resumption of US support. No resumption of US intelligence. Ukraine still would be pushed to make concessions.
Heck of an “arty” deal being offered, eh? So, why would Ukraine sign? Seems the US administration is demanding surrender.
An invaluable interview (and written, not audio, and so even more wonderful!!!)
Kotkin, like most Realists of quaility, is a difficult SOB, and I love him for it. At least one knife jab skillfully delivered to every point of view, but his main thrust is deep and powerful.
On a scale of one to ten, what is the likelihood of Russia using nukes? The reason I ask is because lots of commentators want Ukraine to capitulate because they, the commentators, believe Putin’s threats. Putin’s threats become more powerful than Russias military.
First, strikes me the data to consider regarding Russian likelihood to go nuclear is granular, almost signalarly personal (Putin!), not shmeered around in a consultative group or polieconomic tendencies, nor anything like WWI train mobilizations.
Second, Putin himself is certainly aware that Russian corruption and diversion of funds from intended uses has long had significant volume and is highly unpredictable. The most dangerous aspect could be simple failure to continually maintain and sustain nuclear weaponry that is overwhelmingly old.
And a lot of what needs to be considered comes down to what a rather strange and socially isolated potentate “believes” about himself, his nation, and destiny. As it turns out, Putin at least pretends (and may actually intend) some extremely crazy mystical stuff:
So, on a scale of 1 to 10 my absurdly useless guess is “Heck if I know”. That is more useful than, too probably imitating him, just grabbing a number out of thin air.
Dangerous times. But, under the coverings, we have been living in dangerous times for all my lifetime, and Putin’s extremely ill-informed, ill-conceived, and disastrously executed lunge at Kyiv — expanding his older much more cleverly planned “green men” invasion of Ukraine — jumped the world into a crisis of extreme violence riding uncertainty.
Captain, I enjoy it when we agree, even just agreeing on “heck if I know”, but we also agree that Putin’s nuclear intimidation capability is much less now than it was a few years ago. Whew… I hope.
