In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :
Yeah, those things can go both ways, but I suspect the main audience for the attacks are the Russian elites who have had to sacrifice far less in this war then many others and are pretty insulated from it. The Russian message has always been that the Ukrainians are essentially terrorists who terrorize "Russians" in Ukraine, so it's not much of a change really:
...“The neo-Nazi Kiev junta has once again proven its terrorist nature,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Tuesday evening, suggesting the attack was deliberately timed to coincide with diplomatic discussions in Saudi Arabia and a visit by the OSCE Secretary General to Moscow.
“Without a doubt, this drone attack was planned in advance and timed to coincide with today’s US-Ukraine contacts on conflict resolution held in Saudi Arabia. It was also a message to new OSCE Secretary General Feridun Sinirlioglu,” Moscow said, accusing the “Kiev clique, which is suffering daily defeats on the battlefield,” of attempting to show its ability to negotiate “from a position of strength.”...
02Pilot
PowerDork
3/12/25 12:24 p.m.
In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :
How societies respond to direct attacks is an interesting field of study, and one that is very difficult to understand. My inclination is that totalitarian societies tend to be more brittle than democratic ones when it comes to supporting their governments while under fire, with the caveat that any society facing an existential threat is likely to back its existing leaders, at least for a time. At no point in this situation has the threat to Russia been anything close to existential, and thus the populace has never felt a need to join together for collective self-defense, and instead has plenty of time to think about why food has gotten so expensive, and why wages are flat, and why their neighbors' kids keep coming home in zinc boxes, and why drones occasionally blow up over their city, and why Putin hasn't done anything about it.
Still a crap shoot, but not the same as London during the Blitz or having the Germans at the gates of Moscow.
It's looking like the Ukrainians have retreated out of the Sudzha / Kursk area. This appeared to be an orderly retreat.
As to the motivation... you might say this is an offering to the peace deal (since this is a bit of thorn for Russia), but that might work against them since they cannot offer it to Russia anymore, but it does remove the likely reluctance of agreeing to a cease fire because of it.
One point about a ceasefire that both sides seem concerned about is that while fighting, there is a danger zone near the front that is vulnerable to artillery / drones etc which makes bring up supplies or massing troops difficult. With a ceasefire, either side could re-supply and swap out troops etc. This would likely result in a more solidified front line. The Russians might also use a ceasefire to move a large number of troops out of the Kursk area to the active Donbass areas.
So... it looks like the focus is now fully on Russia... what will they do.... what pressure will the US use if they don't agree to a ceasefire...
Putin is expected to have demands, one of which would likely be the halt of US military aid.
The speculation is that Russia will not agree to the 30 day cease fire. The US is saying they are prepared to impose tough sanctions.
Russia lays out demands for talks with US on Ukraine, sources say
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON March 12 (Reuters) - Russia has presented the U.S. with a list of demands for a deal to end its war against Ukraine and reset relations with Washington, according to two people familiar with the matter.
It is not clear what exactly Moscow included on its list or whether it is willing to engage in peace talks with Kyiv prior to their acceptance. Russian and American officials discussed the terms during in-person and virtual conversations over the last three weeks, the people said.
They described the Kremlin's terms as broad and similar to demands it previously has presented to Ukraine, the U.S. and NATO.
Those earlier terms included no NATO membership for Kyiv, an agreement not to deploy foreign troops in Ukraine and international recognition of President Vladimir Putin's claim that Crimea and four provinces belong to Russia.
Russia, in recent years, also has demanded the U.S. and NATO address what it has called the "root causes" of the war, including NATO's eastward expansion......
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-lays-out-demands-talks-with-us-ukraine-sources-say-2025-03-13/
Regarding a comment above:
The French Parliament has called for the seizure of frozen Russian assets to aid Ukraine. A resolution supporting Ukraine, including the asset confiscations measure, was approved by 288 MPs, with 54 voting against it.
Another weird story from the front line:
A Russian solder was spotted by a drone, that he noticed. He stood near his commanders dugout, pointed towards it, then threw 4 grenades into it. The Ukrainians then sent another drone with a cigarette with a note to surrender to a nearby Ukrainian post, which he did.
02Pilot
PowerDork
3/13/25 12:41 p.m.
Putin recognizes that any pause now risks losing whatever momentum Russian forces might have, especially as US aid comes back online. If he doesn't agree to a basic cease-fire, it's likely Russia will be hit hard with sanctions, but sanctions take time to work. It's a gamble, but he may consider that his best option here is to refuse the cease-fire, accept the sanctions until the Ukrainians are kicked out of Russian territory, then propose his own cease-fire agreement, reversing the current flow of play. Depending on the sanctions and how long they last, Russia will probably suffer some economically, but Putin can easily blame this on the US, as it fits perfectly with the existing narrative.
Any proposal Putin makes for a cease-fire will inevitably include more conditions than what is on the table here. Depending on the language, the US might bite, but Ukraine is unlikely to do so (which is sort of the point). You can expect that the closed-door talks ongoing will lay out where things stand, and be used to gauge the distance between parties. The more intransigent the Russians are, and the more unrealistic their demands, the madder Trump is likely to be, with the inevitable result being trying to twist Putin's arm that much harder. I do not envy the US negotiating team their job - it is probably going to be an uncomfortable conversation.
Noddaz
UltimaDork
3/13/25 12:50 p.m.
In reply to Noddaz :
....(something about Check Engine lights and suspiciously high mileage numbers).... 
Some idea what the negotiators are up against:
Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov offered a vague response on March 12 to the US-Ukrainian 30-day ceasefire proposal. Peskov responded to a question about Russia's response to the joint temporary ceasefire proposal, stating that "we don't want to get ahead of ourselves."[1] Peskov stated that Russia expects US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz to inform the Kremlin about the details of the US-Ukrainian negotiations.[2] Russian opposition outlet Verstka reported on March 12 that its sources in the Russian government stated that the US-Ukrainian temporary ceasefire proposal surprised the Kremlin, and a source close to the Russian presidential administration stated that the Kremlin expected the United States to discuss such a proposal with Russia in private before publicly announcing it, thereby providing the Kremlin time to formulate a prepared response.[3]
Russian President Vladimir Putin may hold hostage the ceasefire proposal to which Ukraine has agreed in order to extract preemptive concessions before formal negotiations to end the war have started.
Senior US and Ukrainian officials have said that the purpose of the temporary ceasefire is for Russia and Ukraine to demonstrate their willingness for peace and that the temporary ceasefire and negotiations to end the war are separate matters, whereas the Kremlin may intend to conjoin them.
Russian insider reports about the demands that the Kremlin may make before agreeing to the temporary ceasefire are in line with Russian officials' public statements in the past months. Putin outlined in June 2024 — and reiterated in December 2024 — his prerequisite demands for agreeing to a ceasefire.[13] These demands include the full Ukrainian withdrawal from the territory in Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts that Russian forces currently do not occupy and Ukraine's official abandonment of its goal of joining NATO. Kremlin officials have repeatedly insisted that any peace negotiations to take into consideration the "realities on the ground," and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov notably claimed on February 24 that Russia would only stop military activity in Ukraine when peace negotiations bring about a "solid, stable result that suits Russia" and account for the "realities" of the battlefield.[14] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Russian state newswire RIA Novosti on February 24 that Russia will not agree to a ceasefire that does not address the "root causes" of the war.[15] Kremlin officials, including Putin, have repeatedly claimed that any peace agreement must take into account the "root causes" of the war, which the Kremlin has defined as NATO's alleged violation of obligations not to expand eastward and the Ukrainian government's alleged discrimination against ethnic Russians and Russian language, media, and culture in Ukraine.[16]
A leaked February 2025 document.... outlined a possible Kremlin negotiating strategy is largely in line with the Kremlin's recent public rhetoric..... The document states that a peace settlement to the war in Ukraine "cannot happen before 2026," rejects the deployment of peacekeepers to Ukraine, and calls for recognition of Russia's sovereignty over occupied Ukraine. The document calls for the creation of a buffer zone on the international Ukrainian-Russian border, including near Bryansk and Belgorod oblasts, and a "demilitarized zone" in southern Ukraine near Odesa Oblast and occupied Crimea. The document also states that Russia needs to "completely dismantle" the current Ukrainian government and rejects a possible Ukrainian commitment to not join NATO or to hold elections that include pro-Russian parties as insufficient measures. The document rejects any US plans to continue supplying weapons to Ukraine after any future peace deal and any Ukrainian plans to maintain its current number of military personnel. The document outlines ways in which Russia can strengthen its negotiating position by exacerbating tensions between the United States and both the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the EU. The document also calls for Russia to grant the United States access to Russian-controlled minerals in occupied Ukraine and for the Kremlin to focus on normalizing its relations with the United States by restoring embassy functions and appointing Alexander Darchiev as the Russian Ambassador to the United States.
Some, not unexpected, updates. I suspect the US will need to try some "motivation".
I am not sure if a cease fire is a requirement before talks. I think generally it is, because otherwise it shows a general unwillingness to stop fighting.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected the ceasefire proposal that the United States and Ukraine recently agreed upon in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and offered an alternative proposal that undermines US President Donald Trump's stated goal of securing a lasting peace in Ukraine.
- Putin is offering an alternative ceasefire agreement that is contrary to the intentions and goals of the US-Ukrainian ceasefire proposal.
- Putin's envisioned ceasefire agreement would grant Russia greatly disproportionate advantages and set conditions for the Kremlin to renew hostilities on terms extremely favorable to Russia.
- Putin is holding the ceasefire proposal hostage and is attempting to extract preemptive concessions ahead of formal negotiations to end the war.
- Russian forces continue to clear Ukrainian forces from Sudzha and its environs as Russian troops advance closer to the border in Kursk Oblast slowed on March 13 compared to recent days.
- Russian milbloggers theorized on March 13 that Russian forces may launch an organized offensive operation into northern Sumy Oblast in the coming weeks and months and may also attack into Chernihiv Oblast — in line with Russian President Vladimir Putin's March 12 statements.
- Kremlin officials continue to use narratives similar to those that the Kremlin has used to justify its invasions of Ukraine to set informational conditions to justify future aggression against NATO member states.
- Russian forces continue to execute Ukrainian prisoners of war (POW) in violation of international law.
- Russia will likely expand its permanent military basing in Belarus to enhance Russia’s force posture against NATO’s eastern flank.
- Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Pokrovsk, and Russian forces recently advanced in Sumy Oblast and near Lyman, Siversk, and Toretsk.
- Russia continues its crypto-mobilization efforts against the backdrop of US efforts to start the negotiation process to end the war.
In reply to FJ40Jim :
They don't extrapolate on that, but I think it is in reference to internet propaganda / disruption ect(?).
I don't think it has anything to do with crypto currency(?)
Here is a piece on NATO that is interesting. Nothing revelatory, but interesting, and hopefully taken to heart by NATO (summary, read full article for details):
NATO Operations Chief’s Five Lessons Learned From War In Ukraine
NATO is taking note of opportunities and glaring deficiencies in its ability to wage war, some of which are harder to capitalize on than others....
Lesson 1: “Collective action rests on the foundation of shared awareness, and it takes real work to achieve that shared awareness,”....
Lesson 2: “It’s not what we do that provokes Putin. It’s what we don’t do. We should have learned that in 2014, and … [that takes us to] lesson number three.”
Lesson 3: “Putin is not a strategist. He’s an opportunist. He pushes on some doors, and when nobody pushes back, he walks in....
Lesson 4: “We are in a strategic confrontation....
Lesson 5: “We are woefully under-invested in our transatlantic defense industrial base to produce the capabilities we need at pace and at scale....
...Regardless, Ukraine has served as a stress test for the alliance and the military thinking and industrial base that underpins it, and clearly the major takeaways are being taken to heart by those at the top of NATO’s command hierarchy.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/nato-operations-chiefs-five-lessons-learned-from-war-in-ukraine?_bhlid=bc87af33ab63be282bfefa1862807a64a95386d6
Here is someones summary of Putin's demands. I mean, it's a starting point, and you certainly would not expect them to start with anything less than something that fully advantages them, but... how much are they willing to roll back? I am not sure how different this is then what would have been demanded at the start. I guess not having "remove current government, replace with Russian friendly one" is a step in the right direction?
As 02 noted, this could take a long time to figure out.
In reply to VolvoHeretic :
Possibly, but again, you still have to convince Ukraine to give up (or agree to absurd conditions).
They don't want to.
Europe at least, will back them. The US is at least somewhat committed at this point (mineral deal), so don't count them out too quickly.
In reply to aircooled :
It was a stiff competition but #5 made me laugh the hardest
Most of those things on that list are never going to happen, and Putin knows it. He either plans to give them up and claims them as concessions, or the U.S. (and everyone else) knows that he is not serious and peace. I think he's probing to find out that the U.S's "or what" is going to be. It needs to be something that puts a lump in his throat and that he believes we will do.
aircooled said:
Here is someones summary of Putin's demands.
In other words leave Ukraine as a sitting duck that he can re-attack later without consequences.
stroker
PowerDork
3/16/25 9:35 p.m.
An idea of what Russia is dealing with. These are just the recent attacks:
Some idea of what is going on (?):
-----
US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz stated on March 16 that Ukraine will receive unspecified security guarantees in exchange for unspecified territorial concessions.[1] Waltz also stated that the United States is considering "the reality of the situation on the ground" in diplomatic talks when discussing an end to the war in Ukraine.[2] It is not clear exactly what Waltz meant by "the reality of the situation on the ground." Russian officials have frequently used the narrative that any negotiations must consider the "realities on the ground" to refer to the current frontline in Ukraine and their claims of the inevitability of further Russian battlefield gains.[3] Waltz's acknowledgement that Ukraine will receive unspecified security guarantees is a key aspect of achieving US President Donald Trump's stated goal of securing a lasting peace in Ukraine, but stopping hostilities on indefensible lines would limit the effectiveness of security guarantees.
The current frontlines do not provide the strategic depth that Ukraine will need to reliably defend against renewed Russian aggression. Russian forces are just across the Dnipro River from Kherson City, roughly 25 kilometers from Zaporizhzhia City, and 30 kilometers from Kharkiv City. Russian troops on the Dnipro River could use a ceasefire to prepare for the extremely difficult task of conducting an opposed river crossing undisturbed, significantly increasing the likelihood of success in such an endeavor. Stopping a well-prepared, major mechanized offensive cold is extremely rare in war, which means that a renewed Russian assault would likely threaten both Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia cities, as well as key cities in the Donetsk "fortress belt," almost immediately.....
Russian officials maintain their maximalist territorial claims over all occupied Ukraine and significant parts of unoccupied Ukraine, however. Senior Kremlin officials, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, have consistently demanded that Ukraine surrender the entirety of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson oblasts, including areas that Russian forces do not already occupy, and have reiterated these claims in recent weeks....
02Pilot
PowerDork
3/17/25 1:21 p.m.
In reply to stroker :
I got halfway through before I couldn't take any more. Between the casual/anecdotal arguments, the talking over each other, and the bad microphones, it was hard to listen to. From what I did hear, they're completely ignoring the domestic side of things (as so many do), suggesting actions that would never have been possible. Obama should have gone all-in supporting Ukraine in 2014? Never happen - too much money involved, his influence was limited (his disapproval was about 10 points higher than his approval in 2014), and there was no way he was selling it to the American people, most of whom couldn't find Crimea (or even Ukraine) on a map. The US should have offered Ukraine NATO membership in the Budapest Memorandum in 1994? This is acid-trip levels of fantasy. How do you get the Russians to sign off on that (they were part of the process here, after all)? What about all the interoperability clauses? What about all the other non-NATO countries that were in between NATO and Ukraine at that point?
In short, it's just not a serious discussion. It's two guys who are in the business, and who have more historical knowledge than the average person, but their interpretations are based on wishful thinking and selective use of facts, not the reality of the situation in its full complexity.
In reply to 02Pilot :
I have to agree with o2 on this. Starting off by talking about "absolute truths" then throwing out a lot of opinions is a pretty off putting to begin with. Using that term in relation to historical topics is pretty iffy in general (you may not know everything even in historical context), but using it for current "historical" events... The fact that they talked about how inappropriate it was that Ukraine was excluded from the US/Russian talks on how they are going on at the time to re-establish communications (seems to a very common misinterpretation) really knocked it down a few notches for me.
Much of what they say is pretty commonly known, and not much of a stretch, but does delve into a lot of opinion ("truths?"). They may consider themselves neutral in domestic politics, but they seem less than objective in world / historical perspectives.
I did think he gave some interesting example of what o2 was talking about previously as to why Russia would have concerns (him talking about training up Russia's neighbors on NATO practices). He seemed to think it was great, but imagine the USSR training up Mexico and Canada on Warsaw Pack tactics(!)
As Scooby Do once said: "Ruh Row":
Russian economy in freefall as mortgage costs triple and mass layoffs cripple major firms
The Russian economy is on the brink of collapse, with industrial output falling and major companies initiating large-scale layoffs amid the economic fallout from the war on Ukraine
Russia's economy is teetering on the brink of collapse, with industrial production taking a nosedive and major corporations initiating widespread layoffs as the impact of a three-year war with Ukraine inevitably hits home.
The most recent PMI data indicates contraction in both the service and manufacturing sectors, with the manufacturing index dropping from 53.1 points to 50.2 within a month - an unmistakable indicator of an economy on shaky ground as Putin consider drastic action....
...The downturn is also hitting medium-sized companies hard, especially those saddled with hefty debts. These firms are crumbling under unmanageable borrowing costs, forcing many to cut back on their workforce to survive...
...."She continued: "On the other, this also affects the lives of employees. "Highlighting the impact on workers, she explained: "If previously they could get a mortgage at 10%, now they can only get one at 30%, and that means they will demand more money from their employers....
https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/russian-economy-freefall-mortgage-costs-34869686
