The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

swerve · Oct 11, 2024

KipPotapych said:
^ Didn’t they get a half a dozen trained pilots along with the half a dozen jets in the beginning of August? Then an unspecified number of F-16s from the Netherlands delivered to Ukraine a few days ago, reportedly? While there is still some number of pilots in training and plans of more to be trained, I believe we only know about literally half a dozen pilots that were ready to fly (and that is evidently questionable). So with the 65 F-16s, they currently have 13 promised airframes per pilot that are ready to operate them (6 less one that was killed a month ago). To remove those in people still in training and to be yet delivered F-16s, I would guess they currently have 2+ available jets per pilot (potentially) ready to fly and I doubt that balance will change by the end of the year. Seems like a reasonable assumption based on the reports, no? To note, I am not at all insisting that this is in fact the case and, in fact, stand to be corrected; nevertheless, to state that there was a year-long delay in the delivery of the promised F-16s is simply not factual. Another note, we (or I?) have never heard about any supporting personnel having completed training and being ready to maintain the base(s) and the planes. That’s kind of a big deal as well.

Rather basic error there.

Ukraine does not have 65 F-16s. At least 65 F-16s have been promised. Most have not been delivered. They are being delivered a few at a time. And it's been suggested that not all are intended for use, but some may be for spares.

If Ukraine had 6 pilots when the first 6 F-16s were delivered, that does not mean Ukraine has 6 pilots now, & will only ever have 6. Exactly like the F-16s, there is a pipeline of pilots completing training.

Dammit, this is obvious! It should not need to be explained. It's been laid out in the public reports.

You're making assumptions without evidence, that aircraft deliveries will exceed pilot training. Doesn't it occur to you that they might be coordinated, with aircraft being delivered as trained pilots & groundcrew are available? And even if the evidence-free assumptions you've just laid out were correct, your original claim about the ratio of aircraft to pilots would still be false.

KipPotapych · Oct 11, 2024

swerve said:
Rather basic error there.

Ukraine does not have 65 F-16s. At least 65 F-16s have been promised. Most have not been delivered. They are being delivered a few at a time. And it's been suggested that not all are intended for use, but some may be for spares.

If Ukraine had 6 pilots when the first 6 F-16s were delivered, that does not mean Ukraine has 6 pilots now, & will only ever have 6. Exactly like the F-16s, there is a pipeline of pilots completing training.

Dammit, this is obvious! It should not need to be explained. It's been laid out in the public reports.

You're making assumptions without evidence, that aircraft deliveries will exceed pilot training. Doesn't it occur to you that they might be coordinated, with aircraft being delivered as trained pilots & groundcrew are available? And even if the evidence-free assumptions you've just laid out were correct, your original claim about the ratio of aircraft to pilots would still be false.

I am not sure what the confusion is here.

1. My original claim was that the one year delay in delivery was not factual because the planes arrived one year after being promised. I believe this is straight forward.
2. I also wrote about what was reported. Nothing seems to be evidence-free.
3. Is it just some misunderstanding?

Here are the facts (as reported):

- Kyiv was promised at least 79 F-16s from the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Belgium, with the first 20 reportedly scheduled to arrive by the end of 2024.

- It is unclear how many of these planes will be operational as some may be cannibalized for parts.

- The number of trained pilots represents another potential bottleneck. According to some media reports, only 20 Ukrainian aviators are expected to complete their training by the end of the year with the help of allied countries, while 40 would be needed to operate the full squadron of 20 planes.

However, to add the last bullet (source provided in the quoted post):

KipPotapych said:
The Ukrainian pilots had years of combat experience in their older Soviet jets, but some struggled to learn how to operate the advanced F-16—particularly because the training manuals were in English and not all of the pilots had sufficient English language skills. Some pilots who began the course in Denmark failed the program, a Western official said.

https://www.wsj.com/world/accelerated-training-in-the-spotlight-after-ukrainian-f-16-crash-08cafb67?st=7t3s6xnv3bc05fm&reflink=article_copyURL_share

- The first batch of F-16 fighter jets Ukraine received encompassed six planes provided by the Netherlands, The Times reported on July 31, citing an undisclosed source. (as was reported on Aug 1, later corrected here, for example, that the planes were actually from Denmark).

Source for the bullets above, except as noted in brackets and source specified:

Ukraine received 6 F-16s from Netherlands, The Times reports

The first batch of F-16 fighter jets Ukraine received encompassed six planes provided by the Netherlands, The Times reported on July 31, citing an undisclosed source.

kyivindependent.com

- “For the first time, I can officially announce that the first Dutch F-16s have been delivered to Ukraine,” Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans posted on social media site X on Sunday, without saying how many planes have been shipped to the war-torn nation.

Netherlands Delivers First Batch of F-16 Fighter Jets to Ukraine

The Netherlands has sent a first batch of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, according to the Dutch defense minister.

financialpost.com

It was also reported that the 6 delivered airframes were accompanied by the 6 pilots. Furthermore,

Only six Ukrainian pilots have reportedly been trained by European Nato members to fly F-16 fighter jets due to be delivered to Kyiv next month.

Only six Ukrainian pilots trained to fly new F-16 fighter jets

Volodymyr Zelensky says weapons once championed as game-changers are now ‘too little, too late’ as Russia’s air defences improve

www.telegraph.co.uk

As per above, they need 40 pilots to operate a squadron of 20 planes. Therefore, 12 is needed to operate 6. In other words, it doesn’t matter if they had six F-16s or 3 if they only had six pilots, so, at that point, they had twice as many planes than they could operate. This is factual as per report, not evidence-free. Their aircraft deliveries already exceed pilot training (unless most of the aircraft delivered were for spare parts or decoys, which also has been suggested, but unlikely at current stage, in my opinion) and the number of promised aircraft and pilots reported to be in training that we know of are going to spread this ratio further.

Furthermore, an unspecified number of F-16 are now on the way to or already in Ukraine, from Netherlands, as per above. My only assumption in the post above was that this delivery consists of 6, which is reasonable, in my opinion - 20 are reportedly to be delivered by the end of the year. We don’t know whether the number of pilots has increased with this new delivery. It isn’t necessarily the case that it did. 20 pilots were reportedly to be trained before the end of the year, but the later report indicated that some are failing the program. We also don’t know how many, hence no specified number but rather a range, that could very well be wrong, which I stated, and stand to corrected.

The lack of pilots given the availability of airframes is also evident from:

Ukraine plans to hire retired foreign pilots to fly Western fighter jets and fight against Russia.

American politician Lindsey Graham stated this after a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The government will look for retired pilots from NATO countries to fly the transferred F-16s until Ukrainian pilots complete their training.[…]

The critical need for experienced pilots is related to the pace of training of Ukrainian personnel and pilots, which is not keeping pace with the plans to transfer fighter jets.

Ukraine seeks retired F-16 pilots to fly its jets

Ukraine plans to hire retired foreign pilots to fly Western fighter jets and fight against Russia

mil.in.ua

In other words, I said that training is lagging behind, not the deliveries of the planes. And these deliveries do and will exceed the pilot training - this is not an assumption but a statement of fact, as per reports.

So to sum up, to make it clear:
- there is currently an excess of F-16s in Ukraine relative to pilots that can operate them. And 2+ is a reasonable estimate;
- as more deliveries take place, the ratio of availability to capability is going to spread further because we know (from the reports) that there aren’t even as many pilots being trained as airframes promised (not even half) and training is actually wrapping up in some countries (Denmark, for instance - talked about in this thread before);
- training is an issue, not the availability of the aircraft and this very likely also refers to quality, not just the numbers;
- the ratio I showed may very well be false, but not necessarily;
- all we know about the ground and maintaining crews is that Ukraine would very much rather have these parked and maintained outside of Ukraine (this is my opinion/speculation without any backing at the moment: I am 100% certain they lack sufficient numbers of both and likely don’t have sufficient training).

Hope this makes it clear. I don’t see anything fact-free here. All assumptions are reasonable, in my opinion. And, to in someone else’s words,

“Dammit, this is obvious! It should not need to be explained. It's been laid out in the public reports.”

Kidding, of course.

Fredled · Oct 12, 2024

rsemmes said:
Allies begin a new phase of pressure on Ukraine to negotiate the end of the war

"Pressure" is a big word. Those who are pressuring Zelensky still give him unprecedented amount of military and economic aid.
IMO, diplomats are more openly saying that should Putin offer to talk (not in the form of an ultimatum as he did two months ago but with real discussion), some territorial concessions should be accepted if it could mark the end of the war.
Problem is that Putin is not in the mood to negotiate.
You can't even propose to talk when missiles are raining on Ukrainian cities.
Those who think that Zelensky should sit and talk don't understand the level of violence of the Russian agression.

KipPotapych said:
Most everyone (analysts/politicians) and their moms predicted the collapse of the Russian economy, just like most predicted that Russia was going to overrun Ukraine within weeks. Biden did and so did many other politicians. Not sure if you consider them serious. Most of the analysts did the same: collapse of the banking sector, collapse of the stock market, collapse of the economy (Biden, for example, used 15% drop in GDP in 2022 alone and further decline after as an indicator, if I recall correctly), collapse of the resource sector and oil and gas in particular, and so on

And that's exactly what happened. If you exclude military expenditures, Russian GDP has certainly fallen way more than 15%. Ok: Maybe not by end of 2022, but by now.
The banking sector has collapsed with the exclusion of Russian banks from the SWIFT system. It goes as far as forcing them to move physical gold across the border to China.
It became impossible to buy dollars or euros in Russia. It's not even sure if there is still a black market for hard currencies.
The entire Russian stock market has gone to zero. When there is zero foreign investor, your stock market is worth zero. You can pretend to operate a stock market locally within your own currency, but it's barely a bad joke.

Numbers provided by the Russian finance ministry are not relevant in dollar terms because there is no exchange rate between roubles and dollars. Everything is in roubles. What we estimate as USD equivalent is probably twice the real value.

KipPotapych said:
"We will provoke the collapse of the Russian economy," French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire told

Bruno Le Maire caused the collapse of the French state finance, so, he is not a serious person in my opinion.
He missed the deficit forecast by €100B!

But what most people in the public believed when they say that is that war will end with the economic collapse. This was wrong. War doesn't stop because the economy of the aggressor country collapses. Instead it increases financial incentive to volunteer in the armed forces.
Ukraine's economy has also collapsed and they still resist.

But it should be understood that the Russian economy collapsed precisely because they maintain a huge military capacity for the war. But as long as Russia is able to continue their full scale war, there will be always somebody to say that their economy has not collapsed.

F16

KipPotapych said:
F-16 were not really delayed and definitely not by a year. They were promised last August for spring-summer 2024 at the earliest.

But before promising by summer 2024, they promised by spring 2024, and before that, they promised by new year 2024, and before that by end of 2023... Now summer 2024 meant end of August and it was only six planes/pilots.

It's true that there are several times more F16's available than pilots. The time it takes to train pilots has been underestimated because we assumed that accelerated training will cut this time by half. Well: Not when the candidates have yet to learn English... and their teachers are French. LOL.

Krusk:

KipPotapych said:
Deepsate reported that things got really bad yesterday, quite some advances by the Russians and the usual potential encirclement of the Ukrainian troops.

According to this link from Newsweek which quotes the ISW, Russian are firmly retaking lost territories in the Kirsk region. They have pushed as far as Liubimovka, The Glushkovo pocket is definitely out of danger.
There is a You Tube video telling of 1500 Ukrainians encircled there according to the Russian defence ministry. I doubt it, but there is signs that the Kursk adventure will end soon. According to Syrskii, Russians have deployed 50K troops there. Even if this number is inflated to present the diversion effect as more effective than it is, and to better justify Ukrainian retreat and losses, Russians have several times more forces there than Ukrainians.

Donbas:
Here is the list of the locations of clashes during th last 24h, by Ukrinform/Ukr.Defense ministry.

Ukraine on Russia:
Ukrainians lawmakers talked about influencing the public in Russia.This guy said something interesting:

Volodymyr Viatrovych said:
no strategy will be complete without reformatting Russia.

It's not clear if they believe that this is realistic or not....

Oleg Dunda said:
It is practically impossible to achieve victory without overthrowing (the government) in Russia itself,"

At another event, Dunda also advocated military incursion in Belarussia to help a rebellion against the pro Russian regime there.
Fortunately Podolyak strongly disagrees.

Ananda · Oct 12, 2024

Fredled said:
that's exactly what happened. If you exclude military expenditures, Russian GDP has certainly fallen way more than 15%. Ok: Maybe not by end of 2022, but by now.

Do you have calculations that back it up ? Please don't put some calculations by Western Think Tank that's more bias. However base on real domestic output and Russian international trade data.

Fredled said:
entire Russian stock market has gone to zero. When there is zero foreign investor, your stock market is worth zero.

Chinese capital and some Global South capital is still coming in. Does not mean if no Western capital coming in, and everything is worthless.

You seem believe that Russian economy is reduce more because they are not playing with Western capital market, and Western money systems. They are now trading with non Western Market, and that does not mean they are worthless. Having no access to SWIFT only means the transaction through Western dominate financial market not possible. However doesn't mean their Banking system collapsing. All this sanctions only increase emergence on non western financial system as alternatives.

Don't get me wrong, I already put in my previous post, Russian economy is suffering the costs of this war. So does Euro economy. However saying Russian economy now fallen more than 15%, is also exaggerating.

Feanor · Oct 12, 2024

Fredled said:
"Pressure" is a big word. Those who are pressuring Zelensky still give him unprecedented amount of military and economic aid.
IMO, diplomats are more openly saying that should Putin offer to talk (not in the form of an ultimatum as he did two months ago but with real discussion), some territorial concessions should be accepted if it could mark the end of the war.
Problem is that Putin is not in the mood to negotiate.
You can't even propose to talk when missiles are raining on Ukrainian cities.
Those who think that Zelensky should sit and talk don't understand the level of violence of the Russian agression.

Are you suggesting that Russia should agree to come sort of ceasefire before negotiating? I don't think this is realistic, nor do I think Russia should do it. I think Russia should go at Ukraine with no slow down until the ink is on the parchment of a permanent peace deal. Otherwise what prevents Ukraine, the side that's losing, of simply using negotiations as a stalling tactic? You can't propose a ceasefire when there is history of negotiating in bad faith.

And that's exactly what happened. If you exclude military expenditures, Russian GDP has certainly fallen way more than 15%. Ok: Maybe not by end of 2022, but by now.
The banking sector has collapsed with the exclusion of Russian banks from the SWIFT system. It goes as far as forcing them to move physical gold across the border to China.
It became impossible to buy dollars or euros in Russia. It's not even sure if there is still a black market for hard currencies.

Do you have reputable sources to back this?

The entire Russian stock market has gone to zero. When there is zero foreign investor, your stock market is worth zero. You can pretend to operate a stock market locally within your own currency, but it's barely a bad joke.

This is simply not true. It's convenient to your narrative but it's not the way stock markets work.

Numbers provided by the Russian finance ministry are not relevant in dollar terms because there is no exchange rate between roubles and dollars. Everything is in roubles. What we estimate as USD equivalent is probably twice the real value.

But both can be exchanged for other currencies that can be exchanged for each other. Meaning they are still connected to a single currency market. In order for your claim to be true the Russia rouble would have to be like the Soviet internal currency rouble - completely non-convertible outside of Russian state banks.

Bruno Le Maire caused the collapse of the French state finance, so, he is not a serious person in my opinion.
He missed the deficit forecast by €100B!

But what most people in the public believed when they say that is that war will end with the economic collapse. This was wrong. War doesn't stop because the economy of the aggressor country collapses. Instead it increases financial incentive to volunteer in the armed forces.
Ukraine's economy has also collapsed and they still resist.

But it should be understood that the Russian economy collapsed precisely because they maintain a huge military capacity for the war. But as long as Russia is able to continue their full scale war, there will be always somebody to say that their economy has not collapsed.

Define collapsed, because we don't see unemployment lines. We don't see wide spread and growing poverty. We don't see a decrease in manufacturing output. We see an economy shifted to support the war, but that's to be expected. During WWII the US had an even larger shift to war time production? Was that a collapsed economy? It seems to me that you're using the word collapse for its emotional impact but imbuing it with a definition different from what people typically interpret it to mean when discussing economics. For the purpose of discussing this war, do you think it's a bad thing for Russia's war effort that Russia has shifted to military production? I.e. Russia would be doing better in the war had it not shifted?

Fredled · Oct 12, 2024

Ananda said:
Do you have calculations that back it up ? Please don't put some calculations by Western Think Tank that's more bias. However base on real domestic output and Russian international trade data.

Feanor said:
Do you have reputable sources to back this?

Western agencies will tell you that Russian GDP has grown by 4.5% or something of that effect. The fact is that military expenditures are included in the GDP.

It's 6.3% of GDP and a third of the government expenditures.
Note that this is what the Russian government wants to tell you. Not sure if they include the salaries of voluntary recruits in it.
Add all the businesses which are indirectly dependant to the military industry and the war.
Then the devaluation of the Rouble in real buying power.

Russia is spending hundreds of billion in non producing and non developing area (war and military). It's not possible to expand a normal economy when doing so. Military spending, at best is making zero return, at worse it's used to worsen your situation as Russia currently does.

The technology progress made thanks to military investments is a myth. It works only when the leadership is clever and when there is real, geniune domestic technology improvement and invention. Actually all the technology progress in Russia is brought by China.

Ananda said:
Chinese capital and some Global South capital is still coming in.

Who would be crazy enough to invest in a country which is bombing its neighbour, engaged in a total war and under the stiffest and most widely applied international sanctions ever? Call me surprised.

Of course, you will always find political arrangements at state levels which will be presented as foreign investment but we all know it's fake. Russia is basically bartering its oil against their imports.

Being unfit for the SWIFT system is the very definition of banking system collapse. It means that they have to rely on foreign banks which are still willing to trade with them and which are still in the SWIFT system for all their international transactions. They became completely dependent on others for this.
Of course, there is always the possibility to make transaction on a bilateral basis with friendly countries like China, some Arab countries, maybe Brazil, but they are still dependent on them. Their only leverage is oil and some mutual diplomatic support.

Don;t expect a parallel economy, independent of dollar and on par with The West (which include many countries from Asia + Australia) anytime soon. China is not going to lower themselves to a level field playing game with other Global South nations + Russia. They see their own interests and they mean it. You should be crazy to enter a Chinese dominated economic alliance. Just by the demography, only India could play in the same league. And they don't like each other very much.

Feanor said:
This is simply not true. It's convenient to your narrative but it's not the way stock markets work.

There is nothing more international, monopolar and US $ based than stock markets.
You can still buy Gazprom or Uraloboronprom shares if you live in Russia and have Roubles to invest.

Feanor said:
In order for your claim to be true the Russia rouble would have to be like the Soviet internal currency rouble - completely non-convertible outside of Russian state banks.

Technically it's still possible but in practice who would want to do that?
What can you trade with Roubles? Not sure if private Russian companies would even accept Roubles from foreign buyers... That would be fun to try...
What you need to do, if you want to buy in Russia is to deposit dollars in a bank account where you will buy Roubles and then pay in Roubles so that the Russian bank can proceed with the transfer. But would they accept that you put Roubles that you already have or other currencies than dollars?

Seriously the Russian Rouble is one of the worse exchangeable currency. It's junk statu.

Feanor said:
Define collapsed, because we don't see unemployment lines. We don't see wide spread and growing poverty. We don't see a decrease in manufacturing output. We see an economy shifted to support the war, but that's to be expected. During WWII the US had an even larger shift to war time production? Was that a collapsed economy?

There is no unemployment because there severe labour shortage due to the war. And this bad, not good for the economy.
Manufacturing output is on the increase. Yes but what's being built is destroyed a few days later on the Ukrainian battle fields. So what's the point?

The US during WW2 is not Russia today. The US thrived before and after WW2. The US has not suffered any invasion during WW2 (and during any other war neither). It emerged victorious and made countless allies around the globe. The US had and still has a unique dynamic specificity for enterprise, capital investment, industrial and business developments which is unparalleled, and which Russia already lacked completely before the war. The war made it even worse.

Note that the US suffered a recession after the Vietnam War and after the Iraq War. The economic loss for the US Iraq War is above one Trillion in 2010 dollars.

The US would do even better if they shifted $100B form the military to public infrastructures and public transportations.

Feanor said:
Are you suggesting that Russia should agree to come sort of ceasefire before negotiating? I don't think this is realistic, nor do I think Russia should do it. I think Russia should go at Ukraine with no slow down until the ink is on the parchment of a permanent peace deal. Otherwise what prevents Ukraine, the side that's losing, of simply using negotiations as a stalling tactic? You can't propose a ceasefire when there is history of negotiating in bad faith.

And I attach this other quote because the answer is the same

Feanor said:
do you think it's a bad thing for Russia's war effort that Russia has shifted to military production? I.e. Russia would be doing better in the war had it not shifted?

If you look purely at a military operation perspective then, I agree, Russia shouldn't negotiate and should continue to go full gears on its Special Military Operation, move more radically into war economy and ignore everything else..
Then Russia has some chance to claim some military victory for the sake of historical glory.

Now if you asked me what would be best for Russia, its future and its population, you know my opinion and you indicated earlier that you would agree with me.

My comment was on the point of view of those advocating starting talks with Putin. Since the latter is thinking only about military glory through land conquest, I don't think it's realistic to hope that he would talk with us. Let alone with Zelensky.

In the purely theoretical supposition that Putin would show willingness to talk (let's say he miraculously cured from dementia), the first thing he should do to show that is to stop long range bombing.
It doesn't mean ceasefire. It doesn't mean letting yourself bombed by Ukrainian without firing back, it doesn't mean ceding land or withdrawing. But just saying that he will stop long range attacks, and actually doing it, in order to start preliminary talks.
Of course a ceasefire would be better.

The very point of negotiating is that you are not seeking maximum territory gain and maximum pain on your opponents any more. In this respect, and the word is well chosen, stopping fire and refraining from assaulting Ukrainian lines would make sens.

seaspear · Oct 12, 2024

This article suggests that Russia is changing its economy by higher taxation to fund the war

Russia Turns to Tax Hikes, Other Measures to Fund Its War

The Russian authorities understand that they would be wise not to distract ordinary people from their daily concerns at a time of war, and that they must be inventive and flexible, avoiding any sudden moves.

carnegieendowment.org

an earlier measure by President Putin to cancel the census was likely to hide casualty rates

Russia Suspends Population Census Amid Rising Casualties in Ukraine

Vladimir Putin's new law halts a key section of the population census, raising concerns about accurate demographic data amid military losses in Ukraine.

united24media.com

nterfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/105661/

Russia Is on a Slow Path to Bankruptcy, But How Slow? - War on the Rocks

Editor’s Note: This is an adaptation of an article originally published in Le Rubicon, which is affiliated with War on the Rocks. Russia is faced with an

warontherocks.com

Ananda · Oct 13, 2024

Fredled said:
Who would be crazy enough to invest in a country which is bombing its neighbour, engaged in a total war and under the stiffest and most widely applied international sanctions ever? Call me surprised.

Depends on what you are looking for. There're investment money still coming in to Russia Commodities extraction and processing Industry. There're also still International Investment toward Russian Consumers market. Yes big chunk of that coming from China, but some coming from Middle East and India.

Point is their capital market is not become worthless and close to zero, without Western Investors. Remember Russia is not under International sanctions, it is under Western sanctions. That's quite big difference on that, International one is not same as Western one.

Fredled said:
Being unfit for the SWIFT system is the very definition of banking system collapse. It means that they have to rely on foreign banks which are still willing to trade with them and which are still in the SWIFT system for all their international transactions. They became completely dependent on others for this.
Of course, there is always the possibility to make transaction on a bilateral basis with friendly countries like China, some Arab countries, maybe Brazil, but they are still dependent on them. Their only leverage is oil and some mutual diplomatic support.

Banking collapse by definition is when Banking system cease to become financial intermediaries domestically and internationaly. There are no Banking run from domestic customers in Russia, they are still running well as domestic confidence still there. Internationaly when other Non Western Banks outside Russia can still trade with them, means they still trust Russian Banks capabilities to honours their financial intermediaries commitment. Whether domestically or financially, definition of Banking collapse is when market and other banks loose faith on them as financial intermediaries. Getting access to Western Financial market closed is huge blow, but definitely not end of days that make them collapse.

SWIFT or Society of Worldwide Interbank Financial Transactions system, is a USD dominated interbank system. I have put this more than couple years ago that absence from SWIFT is huge blow for a Bank to conduct International transactions, but there are ways for Banks to keep transactions to each other outside SWIFT and outside Western Market systems. It is afterall only a payment systems, not something that determine Banking financial health. Banking Health that determine whether they are collapsing or not.

After 2008, there're talk in market on emergence of alternative market and payment systems. In order to reduce side effects to US dominate market to other market. That time, most market big players believe any alternatives will come at least two decades later. That alternatives also will be much smaller then US and West dominate market. However latest Geopolitics and Western politicians that armed their financial market as political tools, reduce non Western (mostly Global South) confidence on Western Market. So now the talk in market the viable alternatives can come a decade earlier then it's tought before.

Fredled said:
Don;t expect a parallel economy, independent of dollar and on par with The West (which include many countries from Asia + Australia) anytime soon. China is not going to lower themselves to a level field playing game with other Global South nations + Russia. They see their own interests and they mean it. You should be crazy to enter a Chinese dominated economic alliance. Just by the demography, only India could play in the same league. And they don't like each other very much.

This is latest Singapore CNA assessment on BRICS. Now CNA is definitely not pro China, and definitely part of most Western Minded media in ASEAN. Thus the talk is not to build one market system that at same size or at par with Western Market. It will not happen soon. However again what they are looking is system, medium and connectivity between their own market, without US and Allies control.

What you are argued are right base on Western logics. However Global market is not Western Market, and more and more Global South try to find ways to circumstances Western Market. Some of them have to do it because no choices (like Russia, Iran, Cuba or Venezuela). However for other most likely just to find alternatives routes.

This's that important to understand, the Global South effort on finding alternatives as their confidence toward Western Market credibility are eroding. Market should be base on neutral trade rules, and not political. Big Western Banks already warned their politicians, that puting politics over market rules will increase erosion of trust toward Western Market system. This is what Western Big Banks has to continue remind their politicians and even publics, the main strength of Western powers is not in their Military, however it is on their Financial Market.

Despite all media paintings on BRICS dedolarisation move as part effort by China-Russia to criple Western Market, the reality is far from that. Most in market believe that dedolarisation will not make USD dominance ended, but will reduce USD dominance as Global currency from 60% to 40%. What's now seems accelerate is the pace, that before expected that percentage achieve close to 2040, but now seems it can be achieved by 2030.

However most Global South will still use USD, will still use SWIFT, will still try to find capital from US and Western Market. What's being emerging is places like Shanghai, Mumbai, and Dubai as alternatives financial-capital market outside USD and Euro.

This is why your logic to see Russian economy become worthless, is right only from Western Market perspective. However not from perspective of non Western Market. It is creating much difficulties to trade with Russia, but there're ways to circumstances Western systems, and that ways is increasing in numbers and volumes. Whether those alternatives market will come sooner or later remain to be seen. However there're more and more Global South nations that believes they need alternatives to shield them from Western politicians whims.

As for BRICS, Western think tanks in last decade see this as just some political gathering, bur will not translate much to day to day commerce. However commerce that increasing put BRICS on map. India and China has much political distrust to each other, but they stay in BRICS mostly due to commercial needs. BRICS will not be another EU, far from it. However BRICS can help the Global South find alternatives commercial and financial transactions system. Much depends on the political bargains, but one thing for sure BRICS increasingly being look as alternatives because Western Politicians moves.

Feanor · Oct 13, 2024

Ananda said:
This is why your logic to see Russian economy become worthless, is right only from Western Market perspective. However not from perspective of non Western Market. It is creating much difficulties to trade with Russia, but there're ways to circumstances Western systems, and that ways is increasing in numbers and volumes. Whether those alternatives market will come sooner or later remain to be seen. However there're more and more Global South nations that believes they need alternatives to shield them from Western politicians whims.

His logic is wrong on a much more fundamental level. Economics is about providing goods and services. Within the context of economic support for a war effort it's the ability to provide materiel and trained personnel for the front. There is no evidence Russia is losing the ability to do either of these things. Domestically Russians have not felt a substantial pinch in their quality of life and Russian industrial output has actually gone up. It's an open question whether this is sustainable or not and of course western sanctions are hurting Russia, but the claim that Russia's economy is collapsed is only true if you use a very peculiar definition of the term "economic collapse".

Fredled said:
Western agencies will tell you that Russian GDP has grown by 4.5% or something of that effect. The fact is that military expenditures are included in the GDP.

It's 6.3% of GDP and a third of the government expenditures.
Note that this is what the Russian government wants to tell you. Not sure if they include the salaries of voluntary recruits in it.
Add all the businesses which are indirectly dependant to the military industry and the war.
Then the devaluation of the Rouble in real buying power.

Russia is spending hundreds of billion in non producing and non developing area (war and military). It's not possible to expand a normal economy when doing so. Military spending, at best is making zero return, at worse it's used to worsen your situation as Russia currently does.

The technology progress made thanks to military investments is a myth. It works only when the leadership is clever and when there is real, geniune domestic technology improvement and invention. Actually all the technology progress in Russia is brought by China.

None of this provides a reputable source for your very specific claim of a 15% GDP shrinkage. You need to either provide a source or walk back your claim. Not 12%, not 17%, but 15%. You made that very specific claim. Do you have anything to back it up? Or is it more off-the-cuff garbage without any real evidence?

Who would be crazy enough to invest in a country which is bombing its neighbour, engaged in a total war and under the stiffest and most widely applied international sanctions ever? Call me surprised.

Israel is bombing it's neighbor Lebanon, yet it has foreign investment. Your logic "bomb your neighbor lose all foreign investment" is ridiculous. Countries at war can still attract foreign investment. And Russia is certainly not engaged in total war. Russia hasn't completely shifted the economy to war rails or launched a mass mobilization. Though I can think of another country that has.

Hi surprised.

Of course, you will always find political arrangements at state levels which will be presented as foreign investment but we all know it's fake. Russia is basically bartering its oil against their imports.

Being unfit for the SWIFT system is the very definition of banking system collapse. It means that they have to rely on foreign banks which are still willing to trade with them and which are still in the SWIFT system for all their international transactions. They became completely dependent on others for this.

It literally is not. Do you need me to look up the definition of the term "banking system collapse" or are you able to do that on your own?

On a side note is the Russian banking system unfit for SWIFT? Or is it artificially excluded by sanctions?

Of course there is always the possibility to make transaction on a bilateral basis with friendly countries like China, some Arab countries, maybe Brazil, but they are still dependent on them. Their only leverage is oil and some mutual diplomatic support.

Gas, wheat, colored metals, nuclear power plants... Foreign trade is a question of what you can sell and what you want to buy with the money. What's your point? Russian foreign sales of course depend on what Russia can produce that the market wants. How is this different from the pre-war situation?

Don;t expect a parallel economy, independent of dollar and on par with The West (which include many countries from Asia + Australia) anytime soon. China is not going to lower themselves to a level field playing game with other Global South nations + Russia. They see their own interests and they mean it. You should be crazy to enter a Chinese dominated economic alliance. Just by the demography, only India could play in the same league. And they don't like each other very much.

What does this have to do with Russia's GDP or Russia's stock market? It might be problematic for Russia to enter a Chinese-dominated economic arrangement, but if the alternative is a real (as opposed to imaginary) economic collapse, would that really prevent them from doing so? Is Russia currently in a Chinese-dominated economic arrangement? What do demographics of China or India have to do with Russia's economy within the context of this discussion?

There is nothing more international, monopolar and US $ based than stock markets.
You can still buy Gazprom or Uraloboronprom shares if you live in Russia and have Roubles to invest.

So you're ready to admit Russia has a functioning stock market?

Technically it's still possible but in practice who would want to do that?

According to you; someone living in Russia with roubles to invest... the very question seems absurd. What do you mean who?

What can you trade with Roubles? Not sure if private Russian companies would even accept Roubles from foreign buyers... That would be fun to try...
What you need to do, if you want to buy in Russia is to deposit dollars in a bank account where you will buy Roubles and then pay in Roubles so that the Russian bank can proceed with the transfer. But would they accept that you put Roubles that you already have or other currencies than dollars?

Seriously the Russian Rouble is one of the worse exchangeable currency. It's junk statu.

It's a convertible currency like any other. Russia uses it in foreign transactions with some countries. I'm not sure what your point is. The question isn't whether the rouble is a good investment from a money market perspective.

There is no unemployment because there severe labour shortage due to the war. And this bad, not good for the economy.
Manufacturing output is on the increase. Yes but what's being built is destroyed a few days later on the Ukrainian battle fields. So what's the point?

The point is obviously the things accomplished by what's built prior to it being destroyed.

Feanor · Oct 13, 2024

The US during WW2 is not Russia today. The US thrived before and after WW2.

Of course. Before WWII, during the Great Depression, the US thrived...

I have to fight the temptation to make a Grapes of Wrath reference.

The US has not suffered any invasion during WW2 (and during any other war neither).

Right. As opposed to Russia who is suffering an invasion. In the rural western outskirts of Kursk region. And that's the relevant distinction here. If the Japanese had managed to invaded a piece of rural Oregon, the US would have been screwed. Seriously?

It emerged victorious and made countless allies around the globe.

One might argue that Russia will emerge victorious and make countless allies around the globe. But again the question isn't what happened after the war. The question is, what makes the current state of the Russian economy a "collapse"? Isolation from SWIFT and the undesirability of investing in roubles are the sole criteria? Shifting to military production in a time of war is your definition of "economic collapse"?

The US had and still has a unique dynamic specificity for enterprise, capital investment, industrial and business developments which is unparalleled, and which Russia already lacked completely before the war. The war made it even worse.

I'm going to need you to define the term "economic collapse". Your use of it clearly has little relation to common parlance.

Note that the US suffered a recession after the Vietnam War and after the Iraq War. The economic loss for the US Iraq War is above one Trillion in 2010 dollars.

The US would do even better if they shifted $100B form the military to public infrastructures and public transportations.

What does any of this have to do with the current state of the Russian economy? Let's rewind. You claimed Russia's economy has lost 15% of it's GDP with no evidence for that number. You claimed the banking sector has collapsed. You claimed there is no exchange rate between the dollar and the rouble (something easily disproven with a quick google search). And then you claimed Russia's economy has collapsed. Again an economy is the ability to produce goods and service. All the data we've had indicates Russia's ability to do so has increased not decreased. We're not seeing increasing poverty or unemployment, things commonly associated with an economic collapse. We have seen large countries go through major economic ramp ups for war efforts in the past and not collapse as a result.

What evidence do you have for a banking sector collapse or an economic collapse? What are your definitions for these terms because they appear to be completely divorced from their ordinary usage.

If you look purely at a military operation perspective then, I agree, Russia shouldn't negotiate and should continue to go full gears on its Special Military Operation, move more radically into war economy and ignore everything else..
Then Russia has some chance to claim some military victory for the sake of historical glory.

A little more than historical glory. Russia has no simple exit strategy without surrendering everything it has gained since '14 and betraying any people in the annexed territories that threw their lot in with Russia. To make matters more significant, Ukraine is now definitely losing the war. They're losing ground at an accelerating pace, they're losing population at an unsustainable rate primarily because Russia is doing exactly what you complain about, raining bombs and missiles down on infrastructure targets, and Ukraine's economy is actually in shambles, unlike Russia's (your nonsensical claims notwithstanding). Russia is set to reap some considerable territorial rewards over the coming ~12 month timeframe as a result of the accumulating damage to Ukraine at the nation-state level. It's actually an open question how long Ukraine can continue fighting for, a question that at least in past depends on fickle western politicians' willingness to continue to provide aid. This war could end very badly for Ukraine if Trump is elected and simply cuts all aid to Ukraine because reasons. Can Ukraine operate Patriots or fly F-16s with literally zero US support?

Russia's position in this war has literally never been better. Russia was the worst off in '22 when the botched invasion and poor front line performance led to large scale retreats not once but twice. In '23 the war sat in a positional stalemate and '24 is very much a year of gradual Russian gains. Following this pattern, unless something changes drastically, '25 could be the year of Russia's military victory.

Now if you asked me what would be best for Russia, its future and its population, you know my opinion and you indicated earlier that you would agree with me.

I don't think I would. I think the wisest course was not to invade and here we agree. But that decision fork is past, and it can't be unwound. Russia can't rebuild relations with the west to the pre-22 level. That trust and cooperation will never be there again, at least not in the forseeable future. And rolling over and giving up in Ukraine won't accomplish much. At this point the best for Russia, its future, and its population, is if Ukraine accepts Putin's last peace overture, surrendering the 5 regions, and agreeing to a neutral buffer-state status, that can then be augmented with bilateral security guarantees from other countries. Which is probably why Putin trotted out that offer in the first place.

My comment was on the point of view of those advocating starting talks with Putin. Since the latter is thinking only about military glory through land conquest, I don't think it's realistic to hope that he would talk with us. Let alone with Zelensky.

I suspect Putin has been willing to talk this entire time. The issue has been that the collective west have pre-requisites for talking to Putin and Putin won't accept those pre-requisites. I probably wouldn't either if I was him. Negotiations are a bargain. You give and you take. On a tit-for-tat basis Russia has been consistently willing to engage with others. What Russia has generally not been willing to do is play by an inconsistently enforced set of rules decided on by someone else.

In the purely theoretical supposition that Putin would show willingness to talk (let's say he miraculously cured from dementia), the first thing he should do to show that is to stop long range bombing.

Again, I completely disagree. Russia has nothing to gain by stopping bombardments. If Ukraine wants to talk, they should get rid of the law literally banning talks with Russia. Ukraine is losing. How does letting up pressure on Ukraine help Russia?

It doesn't mean ceasefire. It doesn't mean letting yourself bombed by Ukrainian without firing back, it doesn't mean ceding land or withdrawing. But just saying that he will stop long range attacks, and actually doing it, in order to start preliminary talks.

Why? How does it help Russia?

Of course a ceasefire would be better.

Better for whom?

The very point of negotiating is that you are not seeking maximum territory gain and maximum pain on your opponents any more. In this respect, and the word is well chosen, stopping fire and refraining from assaulting Ukrainian lines would make sens.

No. You are simply wrong. Negotiations are a question of what you want to gain and what you're willing to give in return. It is absolutely not true that negotiations between two countries are about not seeking maximum territory. It may very well be the case that one country is seeking maximum territory yet sees negotiations as the best way to meet that goal. Your statement presupposes that Russia intends to negotiate under some sort of common ground with the general expectations that the collective west has for nation-state behavior. This is obviously not the case. In my opinion Russia is willing to negotiate based on some sort of equivalent exchange of things with no pre-conditions and no acceptance of any other imposed conditions other than in exchange for something of comparable value.

Ananda · Oct 13, 2024

Feanor said:
His logic is wrong on a much more fundamental level. Economics is about providing goods and services. Within the context of economic support for a war effort it's the ability to provide materiel and trained personnel for the front. There is no evidence Russia is losing the ability to do either of these things. Domestically Russians have not felt a substantial pinch in their quality of life and Russian industrial output has actually gone up. It's an open question whether this is sustainable or not and of course western sanctions are hurting Russia, but the claim that Russia's economy is collapsed is only true if you use a very peculiar definition of the term "economic collapse".

Oo I agree that his logic on Economies and Banking collapse are wrong on any terminology. That's why I put that his talk on Russian Banking collapse base on SWIFT closure to Russian Banks, are definitely not in line on Banking Collapse that most market use. Russian Banks still have maintain credibilities with domestic and non western Players.

However if he is only see Russian Banking, Capital Market and Currency become worthless from Western Market perspective, then he has a point. A point cause Russian Economies, Banking, Capital and Currency also close to Western Market. Since they can't enter each other, from that perspective Russian market become worthless for Western Players.

Again it is become worthless only for those that can not access Russian market. However definitely not for others that still trade and work with Russian Market and Economies. Well off course it is only make sense to anyone with peculiar perspective that believe only Western dominate market that matter for Global economies.

Fredled · Oct 13, 2024

Feamor said:
You claimed Russia's economy has lost 15% of it's GDP with no evidence for that number. You claimed the banking sector has collapsed. You claimed there is no exchange rate between the dollar and the rouble (something easily disproven with a quick google search). And then you claimed Russia's economy has collapsed. Again an economy is the ability to produce goods and service. All the data we've had indicates Russia's ability to do so has increased not decreased. We're not seeing increasing poverty or unemployment, things commonly associated with an economic collapse. We have seen large countries go through major economic ramp ups for war efforts in the past and not collapse as a result.

What evidence do you have for a banking sector collapse or an economic collapse?

I didn't say the Russian economy collapsed by exactly 15%, I said it collapsed by way more than 15%. LOL.
Of course it's not an exact number.
I think that 15 to 20% in loss of petroleum revenues combined with increased spendings caused by the war and other side effects caused by the same war is a reasonable estimate. Give or take increase or decrease in the oil price Russians manage to sell it at.
Domestic non-military production has also certainly decreased by that much if no more because all the state investments goes to the military.
Of course that I don't have evidence, Else I would just post a link and there would be no debate. That's what I believe given the logic of the economy and the Russian policies.

You seem to consider military production as valuable. It is only when it's exported. If it rotts in your own arsenal it brings you nothing. If you use it against others in a war were you are the wrong on just every legal and moral regards, and create ennemies all around you, it worsen your situation. It makes you lose money. It's a waste for the economy. Their ability to produce goods and service other than devices to kill people is seriousely questioned.

All the data that we have come from the Russian Finance ministery. Do you believe them?
Do you have evidence that what they say is true?
The removal of nearly all Western investments from Russia should have had a huge impact. Don't expect the Russian ministers to talk about it. They act as if nothing happened. They managed to rebrand the Mc Donald's branches. Yeah. Russia is saved. LOL. Yet, it was more than $100B that evaporated overnight. I don't think that China or the Global South are currently replacing this loss of capital. But here again, we have little to no information.

Yes: A country bombing its neighbourg is losing foreign investors and domestic ones too. It would crazy to invest in Israel right now. I'n not saying that nobody does it, only that they are crazy if they do it now. Thought Israel bombs their neighbours only sporadically. So the lull in foreign investments should also be sporadic. Russia bombs Ukraine for two years and half now and has half a million soldiers engaged in cross border operations.

One of the consequences of the war is that it became very difficult to move dollars out of Russia. If you want to invest in Russia and take money out, it's impossible. Companies have to apply for a quota of dollars that they can transfer abroad to pay for imports. There is no free currency market in Russia. No free transfer of money in or out of the country ("in" only from countries not applying sanctions).
Of course you can always sell your Roubles outside Russia against another currency. But you won't do it at a rate that would make any sens.

If Russia wins the war, it won't gain many friends. Anybody with commmon sens should understand that you better be warry of being too imvolved with them.
It's also an interesting question what will be defined as victory.

Ananda said:
What you are argued are right base on Western logics. However Global market is not Western Market, and more and more Global South try to find ways to circumstances Western Market.

I think you mean "to circumvent"...

It's a myth. There is no such a thing as The West separated from the Global South or whatever. China, the champion of non-aligned coutries has companies listed on the NYSE. Russia had companies listed on the NYSE. And if not, every broker can give you access to most of stock exchanges around the world. Everybody is trading with everybody and using the same system. This system is not "dominated by the US" or "by the West". This is an intellectual construct with no basis in reality.
What happened since 2022 was that some countries, so called "The West" applied sanctions on Russia while others chose to ignore these sanctions and the crime commited by Russia. Then some intellectuals decided that those who ignored sanctions formed an anti-West, anti-US coalition with Russian (or China) as their leader. It's not true. All these countries are part of the global world just like us. Even better: Hungary is part of the West and chosed not to apply sanctions.
The declining USD dominance is only dictated by demographic and economic logic. Not by some political decision to quit the USD domination. Everybody uses the USD by habit. And habits die hard. But it's less and less consistent with the true locations of economic power houses. There will be inevitably a time when the Yuan will be an international currency just like the British pound was. The war in Ukraine has no influence in this natural process. That trades with Russia is now forced to be done without USD and outside SWIFT doesn;t mean that all of a sudden many countries are going to use an alternative finanacial world because nobody feel an urgent need to circumvent the existing system. they can all raise their hand with Lavrov. Next day they will shake their hand with Biden or Sholtz with the same smile.

Feanor · Oct 13, 2024

Update.

Kursk area.

Another series of Russian counter-attacks have occurred in Kursk region pushing Ukrainian forces back. They have broken through into Zeleniy Shlyakh completely repulsing Ukrainian forces from Korenevo. In the Glushkovo area Russian forces have recaptured Obukhovka. On the eastern side Russian forces are trying to envelop Plekhovo. These successes notewithstanding Ukraine did manage to push Russian forces back from Sverdlikovo. In general we are seeing a shift in Russian attacks here. The neat initial plan to cut the border area and force a Ukrainian withdrawal hasn't worked out. Ukraine still holds enough roads in and out to be able to maintain a presence. Instead we likely have a Ukrainian retreat in the face of Russian attacks along a wide area. I wouldn't be surprised if Ukraine is preparing to pull out of Kursk region, or at the very least reducing their perimeter to try and hold Sudzha and its outskirts.

Suriyakmaps

Ukrainian-Russian war. Day 960: Situation on Kursk front: - At Glushkovsky district Russian Army recaptured the locality of Obukhovka & expelled Ukrainian Army from most of the district with the exception of Novyi Put & Otdel Komsomol'skoye farms. - At Korenevsky district Russian Army took...

t.me

Suriyakmaps

Ukrainian-Russian war. Day 959: Situation on Kursk front: - At Korenevsky district Russian Army launched new offensive along the road 38К-030 reaching the outskirts of Zelenyi Shlyakh. As a result, Ukrainian Army withdrew from several areas, included the localities of Matveeka & Olgovka. - At...

t.me

Операция Z: Военкоры Русской Весны

⚔️Армия России начала прорыв на Курском фронте: идёт мощный штурм Любимовки и атака на Зелёный Шлях для отрезания группировки ВСУ ▪️Сегодня наши бронегруппы неожиданно атаковали и прорвались сквозь оборону врага в Курском приграничье. ▪️Около 30 единиц российской техники штурмует село...

t.me

Suriyakmaps

Ukrainian-Russian war. Day 956: Situation on Kursk front: - At Korenevsky district Ukrainian Army managed to recapture a series of positions west of Sverdlikovo & reentered in the farms of Pokrovskii. On the other hnad, Russian Army entered in the center of Liubimovka. Map: [...

t.me

Russian BTR-82A laying down fires into a treeline allegedly held by Ukrainian forces.

The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Active Member

The Bunker Group

Super Moderator

Active Member

Well-Known Member

The Bunker Group

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

The Bunker Group

Active Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator