Ukranian Crisis

[Feanor]

No, that's a MotRifle battalion. Roughly 2 companies of MechInf in BMPs and a company of tanks with added support assets and missing some components like Feanor already described.

This only helps to end the conflict quicker if the Ukraine gives up. Russia underestimated the will of the Ukraine to fight before and if they are wrong again it will just escalate and broadsn the conflict.

It's a strange policy of backing the rebels up just enough to keep them doing this or that. It's undoubtedly causing more destruction and more violence, then an outright Russian invasion. In March Russia could have taken all of Eastern Ukraine. Completely, and bloodlessly. Today thousands are dead, and the war continues.

feanor , i dont get it.. the current escalation by the pro-russian rebels.. are they trying to gobble up territory before they finally agreed to some kind of 'line' dividing east and west ukraine ? what do you think their real target on the ground is ? i doubt it is kiev.. Total destruction of Ukraine Military ?

I think the rebels are done. There are no more rebels, not really. The rebel figures with independent popularity, and connections to the locals (Bezler, Strelkov, etc.) are gone. They're replaced by grey nobodies who rose from the ranks. Russian involvement is so great that the rebels can no longer act independently. Russian humanitarian aid (if/when the ball really gets rolling) will keep their back end on life support, while Russian military aid (both gear and bodies) will make the war effort possible.

 

[stojo]

It's a strange policy of backing the rebels up just enough to keep them doing this or that. It's undoubtedly causing more destruction and more violence, then an outright Russian invasion. In March Russia could have taken all of Eastern Ukraine. Completely, and bloodlessly. Today thousands are dead, and the war continues.

I think that the core issue is that, unlike with Crimea, this time RF does not want any extra territory. What they want is means to control the foreign and domestic policies of Ukraine as a whole, and the only way to do that (short of occupying entire country) is to transform Ukraine in some sort of Eastern Bosnia, where Russian entity will have a decisive vote on all the important matters, while formally remaining part of Ukraine (this is, actually, most important thing).

If Russia had just occupied eastern Ukraine, they would get some extra territory, and bid the rest of Ukraine farewell. By insisting on federalization, however, they hope to retain influence over the country as a whole, trough Russian entity in the east.

 

[Nick underscore]

I think that the core issue is that, unlike with Crimea, this time RF does not want any extra territory. What they want is means to control the foreign and domestic policies of Ukraine as a whole, and the only way to do that (short of occupying entire country) is to transform Ukraine in some sort of Eastern Bosnia, where Russian entity will have a decisive vote on all the important matters, while formally remaining part of Ukraine (this is, actually, most important thing).

If Russia had just occupied eastern Ukraine, they would get some extra territory, and bid the rest of Ukraine farewell. By insisting on federalization, however, they hope to retain influence over the country as a whole, trough Russian entity in the east.

This doesn't make sense.

You say RF doesn't want 'extra territory' but wants 'foreign and domestic' control of Ukraine policy making as a whole, but If LNR and DNR are highly autonomous as Putin has suggested, how would the RF have control of foreign and domestic policy? Many in the W and SW of Ukraine want nothing to do with Russia and the more this escalates, the more this polarise's the Ukrainian population away from the sphere of influence Putin wants to keep.

Further Russian economic outlook is not looking good at all and further out (6/9months) it will get worse. 7th straight Govt debt tranche got canned again due to near record 10y yields and the Ruble still levelling at 37.5. There is a balance and your core issue above doesn't address wider points of concern.

I agree with others and this is a strange policy for RF to continue to undertake.

 

[Nick underscore]

Russia and Ukraine agree ceasefire..Ukraine says Putin, Poroshenko agree on 'permanent ceasefire' in Donbass region | Reuters

"Mutual understanding was achieved concerning the steps which will enable the establishment of peace," the statement also said after Poroshenko and President Putin spoke by telephone.

Also announced that NATO will conduct Rapid Trident exercise Sept. 16-26 in West Ukraine border region - http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/us-ukraine-crisis-exercises-idUSKBN0GX23Q20140902

 

[Goknub]

I'm guessing everyone will be jumping to support this if it's true.

The Ukrainians can't hold off the Russians and any hope of rebuilding the army to retake the East will take months, if not years.

Russia is on the verge of being hit with more sanctions and Merkel seems to be fed up with Putin so may be willing to go harder than before.

The US know they are looking weak for not intervening more but also realise that Russia holds all the aces right now.

The EU in general just want it all to go away so they can go back to bankrupting themselves.

A ceasefire now makes everyone look (relatively) good to their own people. Until the details and demands start being made.

 

[dprijadi]

just want to share this link, a great read By John J. Mearsheimer from foreignaffairs.com

John J. Mearsheimer | How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis | Foreign Affairs

Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault : The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin

Putin put massive pressure on the new government in Kiev to discourage it from siding with the West against Moscow, making it clear that he would wreck Ukraine as a functioning state before he would allow it to become a Western stronghold on Russia’s doorstep

maybe russia's primary goal is chaos and instability in ukraine and not territorial gain ?

Sticking with the current policy would also complicate Western relations with Moscow on other issues. The United States needs Russia’s assistance to withdraw U.S. equipment from Afghanistan through Russian territory, reach a nuclear agreement with Iran, and stabilize the situation in Syria. In fact, Moscow has helped Washington on all three of these issues in the past; in the summer of 2013, it was Putin who pulled Obama’s chestnuts out of the fire by forging the deal under which Syria agreed to relinquish its chemical weapons, thereby avoiding the U.S. military strike that Obama had threatened. The United States will also someday need Russia’s help containing a rising China. Current U.S. policy, however, is only driving Moscow and Beijing closer together.

The United States and its European allies now face a choice on Ukraine. They can continue their current policy, which will exacerbate hostilities with Russia and devastate Ukraine in the process -- a scenario in which everyone would come out a loser. Or they can switch gears and work to create a prosperous but neutral Ukraine, one that does not threaten Russia and allows the West to repair its relations with Moscow. With that approach, all sides would win.

another great read from pepe escobar, covering ukraine with relation to US foreign policy :

http://www.alternet.org/world/isil-last-straw-obamas-deteriorating-foreign-policy-record

 

[Goknub]

John J. Mearsheimer | How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis | Foreign Affairs

A lengthy analysis but typically anti-American. He basically parrots the Putin line on how the world should be. Russia's aim for another "frozen conflict" have been pointed out since the start of this crisis

While the Russians continue to see the options as an either/or choice they can never be partners. His recommendations basically require the West to kowtow to Russia and it's demands.

Hopefully the ceasefire is actually true and holds, then Putin can keep his Novorussia buddies and the rest of the Ukraine can turn West. It was the best outcome from the start but with the added bonus that Russia is now under heavy sanctions and no one trusts a word he says.

 

[gf0012-aust]

A lengthy analysis but typically anti-American. He basically parrots the Putin line on how the world should be. Russia's aim for another "frozen conflict" have been pointed out since the start of this crisis

While the Russians continue to see the options as an either/or choice they can never be partners. His recommendations basically require the West to kowtow to Russia and it's demands.

Hopefully the ceasefire is actually true and holds, then Putin can keep his Novorussia buddies and the rest of the Ukraine can turn West. It was the best outcome from the start but with the added bonus that Russia is now under heavy sanctions and no one trusts a word he says.

the russians are irreparably damaged on this, they've also been threatening the finns - they've violated their air space twice this week, 3 times last week

they have quadruple the airspace violations of all other countries combined - and this year they've doubled their violations over last year

when they complain about ex WP countries on their borders being too close to the west then perhaps they should think about why its happening

he'll be hoping that the "ceasefire" will slow down sanctions, but considering what he's been doing to the Norwegians, even Russias northern oil and gas developments could be at risk as they are basically all western tech - and estimated to be 25% Norwegian..

 

[Nick underscore]

Typical confusion and obfuscation regarding the announced ceasefire.. Confusion as Ukraine and Russia announce progress towards peace | Reuters

"Putin and Poroshenko really discussed the steps that would contribute to a ceasefire between the militia and the Ukrainian forces. Russia cannot physically agree to a ceasefire because it is not a party to the conflict," spokesman Dmitry Peskov said - Kremlin spokesmen

Regardless, hopefully this is a sign of progress on a road to peace.

 

[stojo]

Typical confusion and obfuscation regarding the announced ceasefire.. Confusion as Ukraine and Russia announce progress towards peace | Reuters

"Putin and Poroshenko really discussed the steps that would contribute to a ceasefire between the militia and the Ukrainian forces. Russia cannot physically agree to a ceasefire because it is not a party to the conflict," spokesman Dmitry Peskov said - Kremlin spokesmen

Regardless, hopefully this is a sign of progress on a road to peace.

Russia was concerned with the phrasing. They said that they can not accept expression "cease fire", because Russia is not part of the conflict.

Everyone knows that, in reality, this is utter bollocks, but it goes along the way of Russia's official diplomatic stance.

I think that the agreement is made. But there is a lot of land to cover. For instance, while Poroshenko can order the cease fire, question is how much control Putin has over some of militia mavericks.

And then, there are important issues. Even if both sides agree on federalization, where will the borders of this new entity be, etc... Already, both sides, have shown immense commitment to military solution of the problems, and that commitment remains on both sides.

Peace talks in Bosnia lasted trough entire war, with countless "cease fires", al of which where made, just to be broken, and it took 4 years to put the end to the conflict.

I think this will be long and arduous jurney.

 

[stojo]

This doesn't make sense.

You say RF doesn't want 'extra territory' but wants 'foreign and domestic' control of Ukraine policy making as a whole, but If LNR and DNR are highly autonomous as Putin has suggested, how would the RF have control of foreign and domestic policy?

Same way Serbia is preventing Bosnia on recognizing Kosovo independence. Through the Serbian "entity" in Bosnia, which is, while completely autonomous internally, capable of issuing a veto on "federal" level on a range of issues, which gives Serbia leverage over Bosnian foreign policy as well a lot of internal matters.

PS. sorry for double post.

 

[Nick underscore]

Same way Serbia is preventing Bosnia on recognizing Kosovo independence. Through the Serbian "entity" in Bosnia, which is, while completely autonomous internally, capable of issuing a veto on "federal" level on a range of issues, which gives Serbia leverage over Bosnian foreign policy as well a lot of internal matters.

That's actually not entirely true.

Bosnian-Serbs in RS are refusing to allow the recognition of Kosovo as it has the direct consequence of allowing RS to do the same to the BiH.. Legitimate catch 22

In your example provided on Serbia, Bosnia and Republic of Sprska. Yes much of the blame is associated with the DA (Dayton Accord), as it provided the foundation for ethnic divisions within Govt. Main problem was the limit of political diversity / structure, coupled with rampant corruption and lack of accountability.

In the case of Ukraine, the proposed lustration bill is aiming to limit Russian influence going forward, regardless of the current situation in the east of the country. If/ when an agreement is reached with the both parties and lets assumes there is a split, IMV we won't have a unique situation for another type of DA. It will be one party goes one way and vice versa.

Another point to consider is the Balkans war of the 90's, was a religious and ethnic struggle for independence, Ukraine is an ethnic issue and less divisive.

When you say 'federalisation' do you mean;
a) LNR & DNR part of the RF? (was rejected originally by Putin 5-6 months ago)
b) LNR & DNR part of a future federal Ukrainian state?

 

[stojo]

That's actually not entirely true.

Bosnian-Serbs in RS are refusing to allow the recognition of Kosovo as it has the direct consequence of allowing RS to do the same to the BiH.. Legitimate catch 22

Its quite opposite.

Kosovo was a former province, turned independent, and Republika Srpska wants exactly that. They could legally benefit from this precedent. Actually, they could, quite reasonably, ask - if Kosovo seceded from Serbia, why Republika Srpska, cant secede from Bosnia? The only reason they opted not to recognize is because of the Serbian stance on this issue. And they made blunt public statements about it.

Further more, I haven't heard anyone in Republika Srpska, using Kosovo argument as you do. I would be amazed if you can find any quote of an high level RS official on this.

That's actually not entirely true.
When you say 'federalisation' do you mean;
a) LNR & DNR part of the RF? (was rejected originally by Putin 5-6 months ago)
b) LNR & DNR part of a future federal Ukrainian state?

I mean option b.

LNR & DNR part of a future federal Ukrainian state, with veto power on important issues on federal level. That gives Russia a way to prevent any strong NATO - Ukraine affiliation, vetoing it by using representatives of LNR & DNR, and they can still pretend they didn't occupy eastern part of Ukraine, or anexed anything outside Krimea.

 

[BlueRose]

Russia and Ukraine agree ceasefire..Ukraine says Putin, Poroshenko agree on 'permanent ceasefire' in Donbass region | Reuters

"Mutual understanding was achieved concerning the steps which will enable the establishment of peace," the statement also said after Poroshenko and President Putin spoke by telephone.

Also announced that NATO will conduct Rapid Trident exercise Sept. 16-26 in West Ukraine border region - U.S., allies to stage exercises in West Ukraine as battles rage in East | Reuters

We shall see, if this is true, then the Ukrainian Army's will is basically decimated. I'm sure Russia will send in Peace Keepers when the cease fire takes effect: this entire situation could end up like Abkhazia and South Ossetia pre 2008.

There are many other factors though:

1. Right Sector may try and continue the fight.

2. This may be another Ruse by Putin.

3. Some Rebel groups might not agree to any terms.

4. They expect the Ukrainians to break any Cease Fire and maybe some sort of a false flag will take place via the Russian Side. (All of this is of course hypothetical)

I honestly see no reason for a Cease Fire at all, especially with the recent Convoy Feanor has shown. Mobilizing like that, without a cause, is not in the interest of the Russians and the Rebels.

 

[Nick underscore]

Its quite opposite.

Kosovo was a former province, turned independent, and Republika Srpska wants exactly that. They could legally benefit from this precedent. Actually, they could, quite reasonably, ask - if Kosovo seceded from Serbia, why Republika Srpska, cant secede from Bosnia? The only reason they opted not to recognize is because of the Serbian stance on this issue. And they made blunt public statements about it.

Further more, I haven't heard anyone in Republika Srpska, using Kosovo argument as you do. I would be amazed if you can find any quote of an high level RS official on this.

Not the first place I have seen this view and quoted from RS President Dodik himself last year.. Republika Srpska Slams Kosovo Recognition 'Pressure' :: Balkan Insight

Dodik said that the entity he leads was "facing an absurd situation in which it is being accused by many for separating RS [from Bosnia], while we are saying that we will not allow separatism in countries such as Serbia".
He insisted that "Kosovo has been taken from Serbia" violently in a breach of international law that humiliated all Serbs.

You think this view is incorrect?

Maybe I should have been clearer, as I think we are agree... The RS is refusing to allow BiH to recognise Kosovo as independent, as it will force the BiH to recognise RS independence. Which is what I wrote

That's actually not entirely true.

Bosnian-Serbs in RS are refusing to allow the recognition of Kosovo as it has the direct consequence of allowing RS to do the same to the BiH.. Legitimate catch 22

I mean option b.

LNR & DNR part of a future federal Ukrainian state, with veto power on important issues on federal level. That gives Russia a way to prevent any strong NATO - Ukraine affiliation, vetoing it by using representatives of LNR & DNR, and they can still pretend they didn't occupy eastern part of Ukraine, or anexed anything outside Krimea.

Can't see this as an incentive to the Kiev govt or W & SW Ukraine.

 

[TankovayaVoyska]

Russia was concerned with the phrasing. They said that they can not accept expression "cease fire", because Russia is not part of the conflict.

Everyone knows that, in reality, this is utter bollocks, but it goes along the way of Russia's official diplomatic stance.

I think that the agreement is made. But there is a lot of land to cover. For instance, while Poroshenko can order the cease fire, question is how much control Putin has over some of militia mavericks.

If you consider that a large number of units fighting alongside the militias are in fact SV guys from Russia, I think it's safe to say that Putin does retain some control over the pro-Russian side. I am basing this on what Feanor has already laid out earlier in the thread; the escalation of commitment surely would imply some degree of Russian control over the militias. Besides, I think both sides are getting sick of all this. Saying no to a ceasefire, especially for the militias, would be detrimental.

Just my two cents. I might be misreading the whole thing entirely.

 

[TankovayaVoyska]

Going on a slight tangent here, but how will the results of the MH17 disaster complicate this issue further? (Obviously contingent on the results) I'd wager it would seriously damage any negotiation for the people responsible, but would it complicate a ceasefire motion between the parties? I'm thinking that the responsible group needs to make a serious concession.

They'll be announcing preliminary results in a week, but frankly I find the fact the Dutch taking a lead in the investigation a bit disconcerting. While I will concede that the Dutch or any European country would probably be more equipped and experienced in this sort of thing, as a Malaysian I can't feel anything else but have my pride a bit dented. That, and as far as Euro-Russia-US relations go, Malaysia is neutral by virtue of it being in another continent.

 

[wittmanace]

I see the mistral delivery is now off according to the bbc:

BBC News - Ukraine crisis: France halts warship delivery to Russia

are the penalties going to be due?

 

[STURM]

Given that most of the nationals on board were Dutch and that the incident happened in Europe; I think letting Holland take the lead was the best option, irrespective of the fact that MH17 was a Malaysian owned aircraft. To me at least, with Holland taking the lead, there is a much better chance of EU diplomatic support and the advantages that probably go with it.

Malaysia is indeed neutral in the conflict and it was for this very reason that the rebels agreed to handover the black box to Malaysia. Aleksandr Borodai made it clear that the black box would only be handed over to Malaysian government officials.

Just last night I was speaking to a senior MAS pilot. He knew most of the crew on board MH370 and M17; and had flown both aircraft on numerous occasions on the same routes.

 

[crest]

A lengthy analysis but typically anti-American. He basically parrots the Putin line on how the world should be. Russia's aim for another "frozen conflict" have been pointed out since the start of this crisis

While the Russians continue to see the options as an either/or choice they can never be partners. His recommendations basically require the West to kowtow to Russia and it's demands.

Hopefully the ceasefire is actually true and holds, then Putin can keep his Novorussia buddies and the rest of the Ukraine can turn West. It was the best outcome from the start but with the added bonus that Russia is now under heavy sanctions and no one trusts a word he says.

I for one dont see how a russia that is sanctioned heavily, and treated as a enemy is at all a "added bonus" literately nothing good can come from that.