History in the Making: Russian Invasion

Now here's an interesting angle that occurred to me. Turkey's economy and currency are in freefall at the moment. Perhaps in exchange for access to foreign currency loans from the US, which would allow their central bank to act more effectively to stabilize the currency, Turkey could be induced to state publicly that if Russia moves against Ukraine militarily, it would close the Bosphorus to Russian naval vessels under the Montreux Convention. That action would have a very real and immediate effect on Russia's ability to support operations in Syria, and more broadly to redeploy vessels from the Black Sea Fleet to other areas of operations. It's certainly a much more viable angle than is otherwise available to the US. How realistic it is, given Erdogan's general attitude toward the US, is another question.

Yeah, Turkey isn't exactly a huge anti-Russian state.  They actually purchased the Russian built S-400 anti air (and missile) system, as a NATO member!!  The reason why the US won't sell them the F35.  Interestingly they have also been selling Ukraine suicide drones that they use to drop on Russian (ahem, I mean Ukrainian separatists) artillery that regularly shells the Ukrainians.  The Russians have strongly urged them to stop doing that.

Another small note on Russian invasion justification.  Russia has been arresting Nazi sympathizers. Which might be used as a reason to "protect" Russians from the Nazis.

Important perspective here:  The Ukrainians have been less than happy with the Russians for a while, and for them, the German invasion as a bit of a liberations for them, so there is a bit of respect for what the Germans where able to do.  So the pro-Nazi Ukrainians are likely more about anti-Russian, then anti-Jew.

In reply to aircooled :

I have heard from other contemporary reports from that area during the unpleasantness that they much preferred the Germans to the Russians.  Officiousness is easier to work with than gangsterism.

There's an old saying in international relations: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That, plus the Great Famine, and some pockets of ethnic Germans predating WW2, is most of what you need to understand the Ukrainian attitude toward the events of 1941-45.

As to modern Turkish policymaking, Erdogan is trying to be a modern Gamel Abdel Nasser, playing one power off another to maximize what is fundamentally a weak hand with a couple of strong cards. He's made deals with the US, the EU, the Russians, and the Israelis, among others, in order to advance Turkey's position as a regional power and strengthen his domestic standing with his rural, fundamentalist voting base. And Turkey does have a pretty long history of opposition to the Russia, dating back to the 19th Century at least. Given the right incentives, I have no doubt Erdogan would side against Russia, but he does have a habit of overplaying his hand. With his current economic woes, however, his price may have been reduced; first and foremost, he wants to survive. He might want to check how this game played out for Nasser.

I think its now all but certain that the Russians are going pour across Ukrainian borders in the next few days/weeks. The question is do they do it on Western Christmas or Eastern Christmas? There isnt a damn thing militarily that anyone in Europe can do to stop them and the US will not and should not commit troops to the effort either. Putin will Lord over Europe's impotence and put a chill on the prospect of other nations considering joining NATO.

If sanctions are placed on Russia Putin will just shut off gas to Europe and freeze the F out of western Europe in the dead of winter. The West's own impotence and stupidity has caused a situation in which Putin would be a fool NOT to invade.

So... Russia is claiming US mercenaries are helping prepare an attack using chemical weapons in Eastern Ukraine.  And the US would do this to what end?

https://www.rt.com/russia/543861-us-pmc-chemical-provocation-ukraine/

Would Russia actually use chemical weapons against there "people" to justify an attack? (They would obviously say is was a Ukrainian attack of course). Well, there is a strong suspicion (e.g. where did rebels get that much RDX) they bombed their own cities apparent buildings in order to justify invading Chechnya.  Don't worry though Russia did an investigation and determined it definitely wasn't them!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings

This article from yesterday:

"Russia does not want an armed conflict with Ukraine, but will continue to take steps to defend itself..."   https://www.rt.com/russia/543969-moscow-prepare-conflict-ukraine/

Seems to tie in with the one above.  Not looking good for a bloodless winter in the east.

I still consider the most likely outcome here to be primarily a diplomatic one. If we accept that this is in large part an exercise targeting a domestic audience, then the longer the Russians keep the pot boiling, the better it is for Putin. The glory of a successful military campaign wears off quickly, while the persistent threat of US-influenced troublemakers on the border can be maintained almost indefinitely as a means to unite the population and distract from other domestic concerns.

I do hope you are right. Blustering is a bit of an art form for the likes of Russia and China, so it's really hard to tie what they say to what they might do most times!

Keeping an eye on rt.com (basically a Russian propaganda outlet) is an interesting way to get the info Russians are getting.  Globaltimes.cn is the China equivalent.  They both have some interesting and sometime quite amusing perspective on some situation ( a lot of "stop provoking us" talk and sh#ting on the US from both of them these days).

Read this the other day.  Gwynne Dyer uas a nasty habit of being not wrong in these situations.

https://gwynnedyer.com/2021/ukraine-an-exciting-new-crisis/

Russians seem to be withdrawing:

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/25/1067993247/some-russian-troops-reportedly-withdraw-from-ukraine-border-area

Even the Russians can't keep their army on alert at a border indefinitely.  Armies cost money.

But I am glad for the easing of tensions. 

volvoclearinghouse said:

Theoretical question:  If Ukraine comes back under Russian control, what are the odds that Putin says, "yeah, that's all we wanted, thanks!", or does he go all Blues Brothers U.S.S.R. edition and try to put the band back together? 

"Hey, Poland, you're looking pretty good up there..."

Nations don't really have a God-given right to sovereignty.  The world map we have now has a pretty short timeline in the scheme of history.  And in this case, you've got people of Russian ethnicity in the Ukraine who are in favor of Russia annexing them.  I don't really know that it's in our interests, or even our responsibility, to keep that from happening.  

https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-ukraine/

Oh, right.  Because Democracy!  

Russia wouldn't fall under Moscow in this scenario. The most likely course of action would be to reshape the Ukrainian government to one that is much more pro-Russian and anti-West. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 because Ukraine was attempting to join NATO and Article 5 of NATO states that a country can't join if it's in an active conflict. 

The migrant crisis, the energy pipeline shutdowns, and the troop build-ups are all cards being played against perceived threats from the West in the Russian eye. 

NATO has grown into something of a huge blob of an organization. Sure, the original intent is still present and important, but there's all sorts of attached bureaucracy and out-of-area missions and other nonsense that has made it far less clear just what it is really supposed to do. From the beginning, member states have failed to live up to their commitments, confident that the US would not disengage in the face of the continued Russian threat. The logic weakened after 91, but Central and Eastern European states scrambled aboard as a means of reinforcing their legitimacy and casting off the taint of Soviet domination. Now the logic is strengthening again, but the EU is an entity with some political weight, and the core of it resents the US as much as it knows it needs them. The new accession states love the US more than the French or the Germans, but then the US is the only one of the three that hasn't invaded them in the last 200 or so years.

The Soviets, and now the Russians, tried to weaken the alliance by whatever means available, and in some cases did a pretty good job (covertly backing Western European peace/denuclearization movements in the 70s and 80s, for example). But the Russians also know that the commitment of the EU core and the US to actually fight is dramatically lower than it was during the Cold War, so they have quite a bit of leeway to sabre-rattle before things get truly dangerous. Never underestimate bureaucratic inertia as a countervailing force on any intended action by a modern democracy, no matter how desperate the perceived crisis, and NATO and the EU are both massive, complicated, and glacially-slow organizations.

Current threat or not, Ukraine is very far away from NATO accession, and no sane Western leader is going to talk about welcoming them in right now. Frankly, doing so would be playing straight into Putin's narrative of an aggressive, expansionist West pushing inexorably closer.

Incidentally, this was an interesting look at one possible Ukrainian strategic approach: https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/12/bear-meet-porcupine-unconventional-deterrence-ukraine/360195/ And the Wall Street Journal has an article today discussing preparations for a guerrilla defense (no link, sorry - I read it in the paper).

Kind of strange messaging coming out of Russia.  No mention of any troop removals (not terribly surprising), but a slightly strange article about an impending Ukrainian attack(!?):

https://www.rt.com/russia/544501-west-pushed-ukraine-war/

Ukraine may strike Russia first at West's behest – MP

Opposition politician Mikhail Delyagin claims that Kiev is preparing to attack Russia.

At the behest of the West, Ukraine may strike at Russia in February 2022 and launch an offensive in several directions, including in Crimea, an opposition MP in the Russian State Duma claimed on Sunday......

Obviously seems to be some sort of Russian posturing, but it does not jive well with the news that there are troops pulling out.  The real question will be: how will Russia spin any pullout as some sort of show of strength by Russia.

One aspect I don't really have a perspective on is the politician is part of a "opposition party" (“Fair Russia – For Truth” ?!?) Is this in opposition to Putin?  Or just a pretend opposition party that somehow always seems to support Putin in the end?

Maybe a little news on the potential sanctions the US were not specific about:

Last week, British news agency Reuters claimed that the White House is considering the possibility of banning exports of consumer and industrial technologies to Russia, such as components for smartphones and planes. This, as part of a larger sanctions package, could seriously affect consumers, industrial operations, and employment.

https://www.rt.com/russia/544483-us-sanctions-ukraine-sovereignty/

RT is about as useful as Pravda was back in the good old days. It's a state media outlet, pure and simple. Your not going to read about real opposition parties unless they're being hauled into court as Western agents or agitators or whatever. If you read it on RT, the first thing you should think about is how it serves the Kremlin's interests, because that's sure what it's trying to do. Analysts read it to try to suss out Russian intentions, but they don't believe a word of it; printing truth at RT, as it was at Pravda, is purely coincidental.

Yeah. I certainly don't mean to imply I believe much of anything on RT (or Global News) but it does provide an interesting insight into what Russia WANTS you to believe from which you can sometimes get useful information (or at least perspective).  That is why I was curious about "opposition".  I really don't see RT reporting anything from any real opposition party unless it was something bad.

Sadly, you really need to take almost the same mindset from almost any news outlet.  You just need to figure out what there angle is.  e.g. I know you need to be suspicious about any news from Al Jezera about about Israel or the US some aspects of UAE and Saudis, and certainly anything about Qatar (owned by the government)

The question probably really should be: Why would they want this opinion to be seen coming from the oppositions?  Perhaps so Putin can oppose it, and look like the good guy?  (which would be quite twisted logic... but...)

I suspect it's to offer Putin the public option of either acting due to pressure from hardliners, or standing up to those same hardliners. All for domestic consumption, of course, and maybe for the UN. If Putin decides to press, it's because of irresistible calls from the more aggressive "opposition"; if he decides to pull back, he is demonstrating his peaceful intentions by resisting "opposition" calls for war. It's a multi-layered web of propaganda that makes it hard to tell exactly what's going on, which is exactly what Putin wants. Remember that we're looking at this from a much more informed perspective than his domestic audience, as well as a huge portion of the global audience that is not terribly well educated nor served by anything like a free press. We're questioning, but most don't unless given explicit cause to do so.

02Pilot said:

It's a multi-layered web of propaganda that makes it hard to tell exactly what's going on...

Can't remember the analogy from the cold war that somebody used to describe watching the inner-workings of the Kremlin. Pitbulls wrestling under a carpet maybe?

RT is mouthpiece for Moscow used to shape and win the minds of the people internally and used to push a narrative abroad. It is a highly unreliable source and most of its stories can't be corroborated with any facts. I mean the privately owned media outlets in the states do the same thing to whatever political affiliation they pander to. 

there's another wrinkle to this that just occurred to me.  Russia has a fairly finite military these days.  Whatever they apply to Ukraine isn't available in the west.   Putin has to be balancing what tools he has to keep the PRC at bay if they sense he's overcommitted....

In reply to 02Pilot :

You said "taint"

goddamn I'm juvenile!

In reply to stroker :

Yes. China has been eyeing Siberia for a long time for the natural resources wealth.

Something interesting on the Russian political front, their National Hockey team wore throwback CCCP sweaters during the Channel One Cup. This is not a huge international tournament - this year, I think 5 countries participated and I'm not sure that the US has ever competed (though Canada has), but it is probably a big deal in Russia. 
 

Interesting messaging there. It is done under the headline of being the 75th anniversary of ice hockey in Russia, but to me, the timing is... well, it is interesting. Although I do really like those red sweaters, I hate to admit it. 
 

https://en.fhr.ru/news/item/87038/

Reports of USAF JSTARS and Rivet Joint aircraft sorties in Eastern Ukraine yesterday. The former is used for tracking ground targets with synthetic aperture radar, while the latter collection electronic intelligence. No doubt that information will be relayed to the Ukrainians, as well as used to analyze current and future Russian movements, specific to confirm or refute claims of reductions in Russian forces deployed in the area. Certainly a very visible signal that the US is paying attention.

It seems, the reports of Russian units pulling out are not changing the situation.  From what I could see those reported movements where 10,000 troops and there are 100,000 waiting at the boarder, so not much, maybe even just rotations.

Recent info is confirming even more forces showing up in assembly areas:

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-still-building-up-forces-in-crimea-near-ukraine-show-satellite-images-2669739

New satellite images captured by a private U.S. company show that Russia has continued to build up its forces in annexed Crimea and near Ukraine in recent weeks while pressing the United States for talks over security guarantees it is seeking.

NATO is now requiring their quick reaction force ( VJTF) to be on a 5 day alert rather then 7.

It said that specifically, the readiness period for deployment of the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) within the NATO Response Force (NRF) has been reduced from seven to five days. 

https://www.baltictimes.com/nato_put_its_response_force_on_higher_alert_mode_over_ukraine_-_media/

... Georgian Christmas day is Jan 7th (Friday)....