Russia - General Discussion.

[John Fedup]

A blunt and to the point assessment of Russian military capability based on performance so far. Clearly could have been better except for Putin and his criminal companions. The article correctly concludes that a robust deterrence by the West must be in place to prevent the start of another episode of Putin aggression which due to erosion of conventional military capability might result in Putin using non conventional options.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/04/30/how-rotten-is-russias-armycompanions

.

Moderator Edit: Link isn't working. Try this reprint: How rotten is Russia’s army? | Stuff.co.nz

Ngatimozart

 

[cdxbow]

or it's more along the lines of "You didn't fire me, I quit you long ago".

If you take a look at Alexander Dugin's (Putin's Brain/Putin's Philosopher/Putin's advisor) Operation Z article I posted earlier, plus some of his many public talks and published books, including "Foundations of Geopolitics" (allegedly taught in Russian military schools) it is not about embracing the western capitalist liberal mindset and liberal values.

It is about a final rejection of the Russia-West project since the fall of the Soviet Union, and Operation Z as the pivot point away from Western values and western "spirtuality", and back towards a traditional Russian culture. So the 'sanctions' are a good thing, as the degenerate foreign influences have left. Russia's GDP per capita is about 10K dollars, Russia- and Putin's old moves to reconnect with the West hasn't exactly worked out all that well. One of the darker aspects of Dugin's message, and what he doesn't mention is that it would be necessary for Russia to rebuild the old Soviet army (huge increase in defense expenditures, to Soviet levels) and fundamentally reorient its economy to achieve these geopolitical aims.

I do not believe that Putin (or the Russian army for that matter) is an idiot like the Western media/instant experts like journalists/talking heads/etc. claim them to be. They just have a very different set of priorities. I have difficulty believing for instance that Putin did not think that there was a possibility that "Have my cake and eat it too Operation Z" could flop and Russia would have to declare war on Ukraine. However it is significant that the Russian leadership really, really does not want to use conscripts. Perhaps the Russian youth have become too westernized and distant from the Soviet age.

It's not just the youth may have been 'westernised', I suspect they are savvy enough not to want to die for a stupid, unnecessary war. They also know quality of life is much better elsewhere and understand life in Russia should be better.

I suspect the main reason for trying to avoid using conscripts is that Russian mothers and fathers don't like seeing their kids coming back in body bags, this creates a lot of negative political pressure on Mr Putin, as happened during the Soviet era with Afghanistan..

Dugin may be influential, but frankly he's a moron, what he dishes up is basically old school fascism from last century. If Putin takes advice from him it's no surprise the Ukraine invasion is a CF.

 

[John Fedup]

I think this article misses a key point wrt Putin. Putin is essentially in charge of the world’s largest crime family. Do crime families ever change upon replacing their “Don”? Removing the criminal organization running Russia is the solution and this is only possible internally by the Russian people. Perhaps there is enough senior military leadership that have had enough of the corruption and incompetence and are willing to assist.

With Victory Day Looming, The West Has 10 Days To Target Putin

Unless Russia breaks away from their misguided leader, a desperate and reckless Vladimir Putin will use Victory Day to rattle his last remaining sabers.

www.forbes.com

 

[ngatimozart]

I think this article misses a key point wrt Putin. Putin is essentially in charge of the world’s largest crime family. Do crime families ever change upon replacing their “Don”? Removing the criminal organization running Russia is the solution and this is only possible internally by the Russian people. Perhaps there is enough senior military leadership that have had enough of the corruption and incompetence and are willing to assist.

With Victory Day Looming, The West Has 10 Days To Target Putin

Unless Russia breaks away from their misguided leader, a desperate and reckless Vladimir Putin will use Victory Day to rattle his last remaining sabers.

www.forbes.com

Don't think it's going to happen. They can't get close enough to Putin to do it and he's paranoid about his personal safety at the moment. A putsch from within the Kremlin? It seems that he's surrounded himself with his ex KGB and security cronies from St Petersburg and they're the only ones he trusts and listens to. After the debacle in Ukraine it would be highly doubtful that he would trust the military.

 

[STURM]

Perhaps there is enough senior military leadership that have had enough of the corruption and incompetence and are willing to assist.

They may be senior officers who are fed up of Putin but whether they actually are against the war in the Ukraine and want Russia to be more open, democratic and Western friendly is the question. Some may be anti Putin and believe he has led Russia down a disastrous path; doesn't mean they don't feel that Russia still faces a threat from NATO; that NATO's steady expansion closer to Russia's borders is aggressive and provocative or that Russia should not continue being assertive in standing for its interests.

Decades after the end of WW2 the July 20th plotters are widely seen as brave/heroic men doing the right thing. What is often not realised is that after
doing away with der Fuhrer it was not their intention for Germany to capitulate on the basis it started a war of aggression. Their intention
was to make peace with the West but continue the war in the East. Not only that but a lot of senior officers who were involved in the plot were also prejudiced against Jews and Slavs; whilst at the same time being not Nazi friendly....

 

[John Fedup]

Lavrov has likely removed Israeli restraint wrt more aggressive criticism of Russia’s invasion and the door to more advanced munitions for Ukraine may happen. He certainly redefines the concept of diplomat (pretty much to Dip$hit).
Israel outrage at Sergei Lavrov's claim that Hitler was part Jewish Israel outrage at Sergei Lavrov's claim that Hitler was part Jewish

 

[StingrayOZ]

ASPI has put out a pretty harsh piece on Germany's reaction to the Russian invasion.

The moral bankruptcy of German pacifism | The Strategist

After a prolonged lead-up, Germany finally delivered on its decision to send heavy weaponry to Ukraine. But the Gepard (Cheetah) anti-aircraft tanks that Germany is offering are antiques that lack ammunition. The manufacturer has only ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

Rather, the problem is that Germany’s pacifism is encouraging militarism. By refusing to stand up to the aggressor, Germany has exhibited an astonishing degree of moral desensitisation.

This follows an earlier piece.

Germany’s feckless response to war in Ukraine shows it needs a national security council | The Strategist

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the newly reunited Germany became a champion and leading exponent of the emerging liberal international order. Germany saw itself, and presented itself to the world, as an economically ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

 

[John Fedup]

“Everyone loves a parade”, well maybe not everyone as this article suggests. Though the Ukraine invasion is partly responsible for Russia’s conventional military decline, I suspect years of corruption is a larger factor.

Russian Victory Day Parade Cut By 35%, Emphasizing Ukraine’s Battlefield Prowess

Russia's diminished 2022 Victory Day Parade does more to celebrate Ukraine's battlefield victories than to honor Russia's wartime feats. With stressors coming to a head for the Russian military and Vladimir Putin's government, May 9 may be a very dramatic day.

www.forbes.com

 

[Todjaeger]

“Everyone loves a parade”, well maybe not everyone as this article suggests. Though the Ukraine invasion is partly responsible for Russia’s conventional military decline, I suspect years of corruption is a larger factor.

Russian Victory Day Parade Cut By 35%, Emphasizing Ukraine’s Battlefield Prowess

Russia's diminished 2022 Victory Day Parade does more to celebrate Ukraine's battlefield victories than to honor Russia's wartime feats. With stressors coming to a head for the Russian military and Vladimir Putin's government, May 9 may be a very dramatic day.

www.forbes.com

I would argue that the "special military operation" invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces is really not responsible for the conventional military decline. Rather, the results of the invasion are really highlighting the impacts of the decline in Russian conventional forces. I also suspect that in some areas, it is less that there has been a decline and more that Russian forces just have not been able to keep up with other conventional forces in terms of capabilities both qualitatively and quantitatively

Of course years of corruption are not going to have helped either...

 

[Ananda]

Interesting advert from Harvard Kennedy School, on whether the present situation is a Cold War 2.0 or something else. The speaker from Yale seems think it is not, and actually can be more frightening because Cold War have more direct conflict in one hand but on other hand provide more stability on bipolar geopolitical world.

This is will be Multipolar geopolitical world order. Thus no two dominant power like in cold war, which in turn can provide less stability on potential conflict. However on this, personally I do think asside that potential of more unstability, there's also potential work out on collective multi grouping stability.

This as Multipolar world can also means each regional/lesser power can have more influential track on their own. For that they can also work more collectively on each seperate deals under their own needs, and not dictate by one polar only.

In sense just like chaos theory, the patern of iregularity in fact can bring their own equilibrium on the ecosystem in the end. Perhaps multipolar is in the end what Geopolitical need to achieve.

 

[STURM]

because Cold War have more direct conflict in one hand but on other hand provide more stability on bipolar geopolitical world.

There was more dialogue/interaction during the Cold War; no matter how tense things got both sides talked; both sides eager for things not to escalate to the point where open conflict erupted. At present whilst I have no doubt there is some back door diplomacy being conducted; it is enough to prevent things from escalating? NATO/U.S. understands fully what drove Putin to what he did and what drives him to continue doing what he's doing but is there a plan in place to ensure that things don't get out of hand [as much as countries want to show resolve and stand up to aggression and to uphold Western values/norms such as democracy; human rights, etc, nobody wants open conflict with Russia] or are NATO/U.S. policy makers/planners/strategists and politicians merely waiting to see what Putin does next in the event the next few weeks still see him failing to gain some political and military objectives. Will it reach a point where Putin feels he has nothing to lose by resorting to certain measures in response to material and other aid pouring into the Ukraine?

Another issue is that even if the current war end anytime soon; will there be any long term blow back for NATO/U.S. from a geo political and strategic perspective vis a vis Russia and even China?

 

[Ananda]

Another issue is that even if the current war end anytime soon; will there be any long term blow back for NATO/U.S. from a geo political and strategic perspective vis a vis Russia and even China?

Whatever the result of this war or when it will end, I don't think will matter on the relationship between Russia and West. The gap between them already now a chasm. Russia will move closer to China, because they will have no other choices.

However China will still try to play around in influencing regional power to fasten this Multipolar world, in order to reduce US and Collective West influences. That's their aim afterall. That's the actual game will be, as seems China try to get more regional power steering (as it is shown on their belt and road policies).

This is I believe what the Harvard Kennedy Scholl discussion think. As China aim more on multipolar and not bipolar geopolitical power structure (as in previous cold war).

 

[Boatteacher]

What makes the current situation quite different - and more dangerous - from the previous cold war is that both Russia and China seem to be driven by more than just geopolitical power structures.
Certainly, somewhat like the cold war, they seek to have influences and bases of power that extend beyond their borders.
However, both of them have specific clearly expanisionary objectives that were absent from cold war 1.
Russia wants to recreate something of an empire for itself; of which the Ukraine adventure might well have been the first step.
China wants to take back/ take over (depending on how you analysise history) Taiwan.

There is prehaps a second factor that makes the current situation mre dangerous. The leaders of cold war 1 had lived through - indeed fought in - WW2. They well understood the horrors and were motivated to avoid WW3.

Putin, in particular, seems oblivious to it; threatening to escalate every time he doesn't get his way. He might be bluffing; but it is a dangerous way to conduct affairs.

Neither of their expansionary objectives are going to go away.
The real question is whether the Ukraine experience will make them think twice about implimenting them.

Russia's only way out of the hole it has dug is to replace Putin as leader and in effect say to the World, 'sorry the idiot was to blame for this; won't happen again' as they make a withdrawal - Crimea being a real sticking point even to this approach. That's not to suggest they won't have to grind their teeth to do it; I accept any Putin replacement is just as geoploitically ambitious as Putin. But Russia is definitely not gaining from what it is doing. Somebody in there must be thinking rationally.

As for China. They are already wormng their way in to places they are unwelcome (Solomon Islands for instance), but the prehaps naieve me likes to think they might be watching Ukraine play out and wondering if they wouldn't be digging a similar hole for themselves if they go to war with Taiwan.

 

[John Fedup]

Russia (Putin) seems to be on a path trying to restore former Soviet turf ( so far to a minor extent but clearly will want more) and perhaps some prestige. China, sort of the same but so far by different means. China wants to grab new turf to enhance their position in the world order also but more importantly for China access to raw materials which Russia has in abundance. At the end of the day all “stuff” going on in the world stage is about “turf”.

 

[ngatimozart]

War is always robbery writ large. It's always been about resources / assets regardless of the nominal reasons given. You've got something I want; I will take it. The next point is that it's always kings, priests and politicians who start wars but they don't shed the blood nor pay for them. It's the general population who pay the price in blood and treasure and are left to clean up the mess afterwards. As von Clausewitz says war is another expression of politics. I would add that IMHO it's the ultimate expression of politics. It's the second most evilest, vilest human activity that stalks this planet, the first being genocide, yet we see nations resort to it time and time again. As a species we invest a tremendous amount of time and treasure in ways and means of killing each other more efficiently, numerously, cost effectively, achieving value for money. It's a common saying amongst service personnel that the equipment, arms, and protective kit you are issued with is built by the cheapest bidder. Another one is if you can't take a joke you shouldn't joined.

So what is Putin really after? What resources is he after? What does Ukraine have that's worth the expense of going to war to rob? Is it the human capital - labour, slave labour (gulags)? If it's that, are they worth the expense of having to subjugate, support, feed, cloth, house, police, guard, etc? Is it for mineral wealth - hydrocarbons etc., and other resources such as the prime agricultural land? What's in Moldova that he wants to steal? What are the resources their? Are they extensions of the Romanian oil fields? We really have to look at what resources that are attractive to Putin that have actual value. I would suggest that anything else is a smoke screen.

Many believe that Hitler's attack on the USSR (OP BARBAROSSA) was because he was a rabid anti communist and yes he was. If you read Mein Kampf he even says so, but also in Mein Kampf said that Germany need lebensraum (living room) in the east and Russia was the obvious place because it had plenty of space and was populated by untermenschen (sub humans). Later he said that the German people would farm the prime agricultural land upon the steppes and that Germany would benefit from the Russian oilfields in the Caucuses. Of course he ended up becoming fixated on Stalingrad (Volgograd) and that cost him both the Caucuses and ultimately, the war. So his main reason was robbery and the ideological reasoning was justification for the robbery.

 

[Boatteacher]

I think the only appropriate answer is "Empire", meaning greatness.
I don't know it's something he intends to steal, so much as create; albiet by stealing the things he needs to have to create it.
That means land area and population; but not necessarily in the practical way you look at it.

 

[Rob c]

An interesting article in MSM news by a Polish/New Zealander currently working in Poland as a professor in Warsaw in which he calls Putin, the 21st century avatar of Adolf Hitler. He makes a clear case as why Putin needs to be stopped for the good of both Europe and Russia.

MSN

 

[Stuart M]

An interesting article in MSM news by a Polish/New Zealander currently working in Poland as a professor in Warsaw in which he calls Putin, the 21st century avatar of Adolf Hitler. He makes a clear case as why Putin needs to be stopped for the good of both Europe and Russia.

MSN

I look on Putin, with all the bombast and shirtless shots, whilst residing over a nation with a shrinking economy and population, more as a Mussolini type figure.
Now Emperor Xi of China I think of as a better approximation of a Hitler type figure in practice.

Having said all of that, I am not a fan of all this comparing of current day figures to those of history, especially when it's media and politicians doing it, it reeks of propaganda and lack of thought.

So, let Putin be Putin and treat him as he is not as our imaginations think he should be.

We do ourselves a disservice when making such comparisons beyond the need of 'stopping them'(how does one stop nuclear armed nations? surely one can only check a route of advance?), primarily by risking giving ourselves a false sense of confidence and unreasonable certainty of favourable outcomes.

We must be cautious of what I would call the fallacy of the ancestral favourable outcome; just because our ancestors have prevailed in superficially similar circumstances, it is not a given that we will, as at any given point in time we and the circumstances we face are unique.

 

[ngatimozart]

An interesting article in MSM news by a Polish/New Zealander currently working in Poland as a professor in Warsaw in which he calls Putin, the 21st century avatar of Adolf Hitler. He makes a clear case as why Putin needs to be stopped for the good of both Europe and Russia.

MSN

Quite a good article and offers a different dimension. As an aside I read newsroom every day @Rob c because they have some interesting stuff on it. I don't necessarily agree with the author's assertion that Putin is a 21st Century Hitler, because he's got more brains than Hitler ever had, but he's most definitely a Fascist / Nazi.

I look on Putin, with all the bombast and shirtless shots, whilst residing over a nation with a shrinking economy and population, more as a Mussolini type figure.

Definitely not. Putin is far more cunning and dangerous than either Hitler or Mussolini ever were. Hitler was the best General the allies ever had. Yes you are right about Mussolini, however he did get Italian trains to run on time. That was a feat in itself.

Now Emperor Xi of China I think of as a better approximation of a Hitler type figure in practice.

Here I definitely disagree. Xi makes Hitler look like a has been. If you want a historical comparison to Xi, think of Stalin with access to modern surveillance technology. Then infuse that with Mao's inwards looking peasant based ideology and you have Xi.

Having said all of that, I am not a fan of all this comparing of current day figures to those of history, especially when it's media and politicians doing it, it reeks of propaganda and lack of thought.

So, let Putin be Putin and treat him as he is not as our imaginations think he should be.

We do ourselves a disservice when making such comparisons beyond the need of 'stopping them'(how does one stop nuclear armed nations? surely one can only check a route of advance?), primarily by risking giving ourselves a false sense of confidence and unreasonable certainty of favourable outcomes.

We must be cautious of what I would call the fallacy of the ancestral favourable outcome; just because our ancestors have prevailed in superficially similar circumstances, it is not a given that we will, as at any given point in time we and the circumstances we face are unique.

We are treating Putin as he is. However comparisons to previous tyrants and genocidal maniacs cannot be avoided because that is one of the criteria that we use to measure a leaders worth, especially one who is running a repressive authoritarian dictatorship. How do you assess someone like Putin if you cannot actively compare and contrast them with historical metrics such as Hitler, Stalin, Robespierre, Ivan the Terrible, Polpot, Papa Doc Duvalier, Mao etc?

We don't do ourselves a disservice by looking at comparisons or options beyond "stopping" them. In fact it's very important to plan ahead and plan for all possible outcomes. The end of WW1 taught us that because it directly lead to Hitler, the Holocaust, WW2, The Middle East wars and crisis etc. The complete diplomatic balls up from the ashes of WW1 still reverberates throughout the world today, 103 years and one devastating war later.

Those who don't understand how ill prepared the major western nations are militarily, have this ill-conceived belief that the likes of the US and NATO will prevail on the battlefield and it'll be home in time for tea, scones and medals. Their are fools who should know better who continue to encourage this belief. You see none of the DEFPROs and various others in here, rest on the laurels of our tupuna toa, warrior ancestors, who achieved great victories for we know that the next battle hasn't been fought yet, and any plan no matter how good is only valid until first contact with the enemy. We hold huge respect for our tupuna toa, their achievements and sacrifices, but they are in the past and whilst we assimilate all the learnings from their experiences, those learnings only inform our preparation for the next battle, which will be different and present unique challenges.

 

[STURM]

I don't necessarily agree with the author's assertion that Putin is a 21st Century Hitler, because he's got more brains than Hitler ever had, but he's most definitely a Fascist / Nazi.

I think there's much more to it than that.

Putin and Hitler are different people from different eras; driven by different dynamics prevalent from their period. Hitler made various well documented decisions but he also made a lot of sound ones. Prior to the war he had a pretty good feel or reading as to how much he could push his opponents in order to get what he wanted and he was quite successful in this regard. Once war started; despite his well known blunders; he also made a number of sound decisions; e.g. the decision to hold fast and not go into a full retreat in late 1941 after being stalled outside of Moscow; the decision to focus on the south in 1942 because of economic factors; the decision in 1945 to move on the Balaton area for fuel [irrespective of the fact that success was impossible]; the decision to hold on to the Baltics and later the Courland for military and political reasons; etc. Contrary to widespread misconception it wasn't always a case of an erratic and ill informed Hitler ignoring the advice of his much better informed military advisors. If Hitler had relied on his military advisors and high command; the invasion of France would not have gone down as it did; would have stagnated into another long drawn out attritional campaign. IMO his biggest blunder was assuming that Britain and France would not declare war over Poland in September 1393 but even then; if the price was right; despite all the rhetoric and propaganda; his enemies were willing to consider peace talks; even the Soviets as late as 1942. Details are still murky with a lot of stuff still still barred from public release. We can his biggest blunder was invading the Soviet Union but that was expected; part and parcel of the Nazi DNA. Whether Germany would ultimately have lost had it not also been engaged in a war in the West makes for interesting speculation.

With Putin it's harder to say as there's a lot we still don't know apart from the fact that he miscalculated badly with the invasion and made a number of highly flawed assumptions which cost his country dearly. IMO there is still a lot we don't know with regards to the Ukraine invasion; i.e. the part outside countries played; the final straw for Putin; etc.