Quote (bogie160 @ 5 Feb 2023 20:39)
It will be interesting to see how the next month goes. The mobilization was a shit show, and men were tossed in with minimal equipment and training to relieve front line units and stabilize the line. But it looks like the greater part of the mobilization (200-300k) was kept in reserve while they were trained and supplied more methodically. Now we're going to see that brought to bear against Ukrainian lines that are understandably exhausted. I don't know what will happen, but I'm less confident in Ukraine's long-term outlook than the "they are winning and certainly will win" crowd.
Agreed. At present, claiming that
either side will "certainly" win is foolish. The imminent Russian offense will imho be the pivotal moment of this war. If Russia is able to break through the frontlines in decisive fashion, there is a chance that Ukraine's defense collapses and Russia can seize significant territory. If Ukraine is able to largely hold the current lines (give up Bakhmut and retreat to, but hold, Solviansk), Russia will probably have exhausted its offensive potential.
In recent weeks, the Russians have clearly used their disposable proxy forces as cannon fodder to try to exhaust and soften up Ukraine's defense. The big unknown is how effective these attempts were, how much material and manpower Ukraine actually lost.
Quote (bogie160 @ 6 Feb 2023 06:38)
On the topic of existential crises, the answer that I've seen ad nauseam is some version of "Russia shouldn't have invaded in the first place". Sure, granted, but they have. And asking the Russian regime to accept annihilation because of that is moving into the realm of fantasy. They're going to play this out because their survival depends on it. There's no off-ramp right now, but the limited focus should be to prevent a Ukrainian collapse in the core territories and force Russia to negotiate an end to the fighting. It will involve loss of Ukrainian territory, but in that Ukraine will be free of the vast majority of their ethnic and cultural Russian population, and will be integrated in NATO, which will provide a more unified Ukraine with the military and economic support that it needs. Kissinger is correct, there's no total victory to be had here, and because NATO is bankrolling the conflict, it has every right to set conditions with the Ukrainian political establishment.
Talks about the collapse of Russia or Putin's regime are just fantasy, Western wishcasting. In particular, I would argue that Russia having to largely retreat to the territory they controlled pre-war (they can keep the smoldering ruins of the city formerly known as Mariupol...) would certainly not be a bad enough outcome that Putin's regime is at threat of collapse (and thus willing to engage in a nuclear escalation).
On the other hand, I don't think your proposed off-ramp is realistic before further fighting has happened. Russia will only begrudgingly accept the rest of Ukraine joining the EU and perhaps even NATO if they can't stop it. As long as the Ukrainian government thinks there is a chance they could recapture the lost ground in future counteroffenses, they will not agree to cede territory. Likewise, as long as Russia's offensive capabilities haven't been exhausted and grinded down, they will not let (the rest of) Ukraine off the hook, will not allow them to join Western unions and alliances.
So on balance, I believe that further bloodshed is necessary to arrive at the kind of stalemate which forces both sides to come to the negotiating table and engage in actual, good faith peace talks.
This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 6 2023 04:51am