The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[Ananda]

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.

Thanks for pointing the mistakes, yes should be circumvent, seems the spelling check change that.

Congratulations to understand all Global market is connected. However it is also not myth on seperate market. They are interconnected, but also they are seperate on political control. Those Global South still want market that are not politically control by Western politicians. moreover after all geopolitics situation happened.

Yes the system should only be control by Market, however now (like SWIFT and other USD dominate market instruments) shown can easily control by political whims. That's what the Global South players realise, there're no markets that immune from political overules. For that they want market system that have alternative control by them.

You are mixing market interconnectivity and market control. Latest political intervention to market system by Western politicians shown there are no ideal market free from political whims. Seems you don't understand why Western politicians that drove alternative market, from current Western dominate ones. It will not going at par with Western ones soon, but Western Politicians just make push it sooner then many market players expectations before.

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.

You are only looking from Western political perspectives, so that's why you don't understand why the drive to find alternative from Non Western players. Again don't mix interconnectivity between markets and the need for their desire to control their own market. They don't mind to use Western market as long as it is beneficial for them. However when they see the market can be use as weapon to whoever Western political establishment deemed as 'anti West's, then they decided the need for alternative system has arise.

The market whether present Western Dominate ones and emerging Non Western markets will continue keep interconnectivity. However the Non Western market will continue their drive to build alternative system that are not under control Western political establishment. Big Banks in West already warned Western politicians on this, seems you believe the different perspective. Perspective that's seems more influence by Western political establishment. Well will see whose right.

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).

No you can take your money from Russia. Those Russian that stay outside Russia for long time like in Bali or Phuket show that. However it will not be in USD or Euro or other currencies that their financial market close the connection to Russia Financial Market. However there are no problem to get your fund outside Russia using currency that the financial markets still open to Russian ones. So you use Yuan, Rupee or UAE Dhirham as Shanghai, Mumbai and Dubai still open trade with Moscow market.

Like I said, if you looking on perspective only Western currencies, then yes or is not easy to take that from Russian market, because they are closing to each other. However that doesn't mean you can't take out your capital or trade income from Russia, it is just not on Western currencies.

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.

No, again the drive is not because Russian-Ukrainian war. The drive is because Global South did not want their capital and market become hostages to Western political whims. Non Western market players are loosing confidence on Western Market supposedly neutral from Poltical Intervention. You will never understand that as long as you only see on the eyes of Western Political benevolence.

All this talk again shown how Russian market is not crumbling, or become worthless and their economy is failing. Remember all that's is your claim. Then again you also understand that Russian still trading with Non Western players, heck even some Western players still trade with Russian. Not a sign of failing economy as you claim.

Russia economy is also not on full War Time Economy yet. They are in Import Substition Economy, thus most of their products is not for War Effort, but more on producing goods to substitute import. Off course Western Media and Think Tank say otherwise. However if they are only doing production for War Effort, then there are already run down on consumers products.

That's not happening as asside Import from China, they are also manage to produce Import Substition from mostly Western products. Not saying their Import Substition manage to replace all imports, but also shown their economy is not in overall war products economy as Western sources said. I said this because there are enough import data from China and India that shown Russia import capital goods to increase their own domestic production.

US has failed to counter Russia’s import substitution strategy - Asia Times

On February 8, drowned out by the flood of commentary that followed his interview with Tucker Carlson, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave the Kremlin

asiatimes.com

Again not saying Russia economy in good place already, however also not failing for foreseable future yet.

 

[Feanor]

All this talk again shown how Russian market is not crumbling, or become worthless and their economy is failing. Remember all that's is your claim. Then again you also understand that Russian still trading with Non Western players, heck even some Western players still trade with Russian. Not a sign of failing economy as you claim.

Case in point, here's an EU member and a major supporter of Ukraine caught buying Russian oil bypassing sanctions. And I'm not being sarcastic when I call them a major supporter. The Czech Republic really has done a lot for Ukraine and continues to do much.

Czech industry profiting from Russian oil sanctions loophole, research reveals

One company in particular has earned €1.2 billion in extra profits, despite alternatives being available.

www.politico.eu

 

[Redshift]

However the Non Western market will continue their drive to build alternative system that are not under control Western political establishment.

Life will be soon much better for the "global south" when the markets are under Chinese political control ...........

 

[rsemmes]

It's true that they depend on Western aid. However I don't expect this aid to dwindle soon. I don't believe that Trump will cut aid to Ukraine totaly and within two weeks. The reason why I believe that is that the aid to Ukraine is a tiny portion of the US Federal budget. And the US has much to gain with continuous experience with the war in Ukraine to develop its own military. Also, if Trump takes this decision, he will have to cope with accepting "yet another defeat" by the US "after Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq" (between brackets because these were not real defeats, but some people says so). I don't think he will wants another international humiliation for the US.
And finaly, you have the most compelling argument that you simply can't let brutal force and blackmail prevail. There is a very good reason why humanity has to defeat Putin.

Secondly, Europe is taking the matter very seriously. Europe sees the war in Ukraine and its own defence against Russia as one and a single topic, without distinction. For Europe, the front line is not the Donbas, Zaporyzha and Sumy, but from the Artic Circle to Syria. Ukraine will definitely be a NATO member. The decision is taken. It's a very important part of the defence strategy. Both because the Ukrainian population wants to be allied with the West, and because Putin showed agressive behavior.
I think that European military development will only increase in the future and military aid to Ukraine is part of this development. Russia will have to follow up if Putin wants to win.

Two things are very surprising thought: European countries located far from Ukraine like France, Portugal and Spain show the same concern about the Russian treath as Nordic and east European countries do.
The second surprise is the reluctance of Hungary to participate. Hugary is like a glitch in the program.

The biggest problem for Ukraine is that European politiicians are willing to help militarily, they talk about it all the time, but they have huge difficulties to do the things concretely. It's not an economical problem. It's not a problem with money. It's that European politicians don't understand how the industry works and how things are build in the factories. They think that you just give the money and things will pop up instantly by magic. That's why we witness extremely long delays and deliveries far smaller than what was announced.

Even if Ukraine loses the war, i.e. they give up more territories than they already lost by now, they will join NATO. Period. 100%. There won't be even a ceasefire if Ukrainians are not going to join NATO because for Ukrainians a peace agreement without NATO is pointless. They are 100% sure to be invaded again in a freseable future if they don't. So if Putin wants an agreement he will have to agree with this.

That being said, it doesn't mean it will happens like that. Ukraine could collapse totaly and be finaly overtaken by Russia, or lose half of its terriitory, with the Dniepr as the new border, and finaly forced to stay out of NATO if they want to keep what they are left with. It's a very possible scenario.

"Put your (European politiicians) money where your mouth is.

I see a huge contradiction there. "Europe is taking the matter very seriously" and, at the same time, "but they have huge difficulties to do the things concretely." I see the "concern", (and not about Ukraine's future) but not "the front line".
So, all "It's that European politicians don't understand..." European Politicians are stupid, according to you. It is not that I disagree, but those are "big words", right?
Maybe, you are optimistically mixing political statements and slogans with actual intentions and, specifically, actions.

"Period"? Are you talking for Putin, Zelenskyi, Rutte or all of the above? I'll give you another option, Putin declares War (and just freezes the conflict). Will an Ukraine at war join NATO?

 

[Fredled]

@Ananda Global markets are not controled by the US or by the West. Each country has their own banks and stock exchanges under their juridiction.
You said yourself that it's still possible to transfer money to and from Russian outside the SWIFFT system. In fact there are quite a lot of countries, many of them US allies and even the U.S. Virgin Islands. Swifft is not even an US company, it's a Belgian company and controlled by the Central Banks of 10 countries from the West, the G10, in cooperation with many other western and non western countries. So, it's possible to function without Swifft. However, for Russia, being banned from Swifft creates a lot of technical problems and huge financial losses because 70% (I don't remember the exact number but it's around 70) of their exports were to European countries. It also create problem to make payment to China and all non-western countries (e.g. countries not applying sanction against Russia) who are using Swifft.
Yes it's still possible to transfer money in and out Russia from non sanctioning countries. But transfering profits or sales proceeds is another thing after you include the exchange rate and transfer fees. Using cryptos may be cheaper.

It's also one of the reasons why China, India and maybe other countries pay Russia with their own currency. The other reason is that they seize the occasion to rip off Russia.

I don't think that the so called Global South is anxious about the domination of the West and of Western political whims. Their interrests are not incompatible with those of the West. That's why I don't like these two labels. I don;t think that sanctioning Iran and Russia are whims. It's not difficult to understand why we do it.
In fact they are all very happy that the West applied these sanctions because they can dictate their conditions to Russia, while before 2022, it was the opposite.

Life will be soon much better for the "global south" when the markets are under Chinese political control ..........

If this comment is sarcastic, please add a smiley.

Ok, back on topic:
In the Kursk region, the maps showed something similar to Ukrainian forces being almost encircled. As Feanor suggested, it may be that Ukrainian are simply withdrawing massively and the map is not up to date because the Russians have not had the time to move there and fill the gap.
The operations in this region are very dynamic and don't obey to the logic of front line as in the Donbass. Unlike the Donbas, if Ukrainians withdraw, they don't lose territory.

Russia hit a Ukrainian base near Transnetria, in Odessa region. It's unclear why or what the target was but there have been recent rumors that Ukraine intends to attack Transnestria.

That would be something! However that would have to be coordinated with Moldova and at Moldova's demand because it's Moldav land.
That would be another nice way to put immobilized troops in action. if Transnistria is freed from Russian osupation, they can reduce the number of troops there.
Unfortunaltely, I don't think Ukrainians have such a plan or that they have even remotely the necessary ressources for that.

In Feodosiya a fuel storage facility has two tanks burning. Russian sources claim it was an accident.

Satellite pictures show 8 tanks burning. But 2, 5, 8 or 10 that's not the point. The point is that Ukrainian hit Russian bases regularly with inreased effectiveness.

France will allegedly supply another 12 Caesar howitzers to Ukraine.

They are also supplying new barrels to replace the used ones. Indication that few Ceasars have been destroyed or lost. Ukrainians are using barrels well above the recomended limit without losing acuracy.

Reportedly the first F-16s from the Netherlands arrived in Ukraine.

Does it has a pilot? LOL.

Near Dnepropetrovsk Russia hit a Patriot position. They focused on the radar and control vehicle, but I'm wondering why they didn't hit the TELs also.

Because the radar and the computers are the most expensive parts.

 

[Fredled]

I see a huge contradiction there. "Europe is taking the matter very seriously" and, at the same time, "but they have huge difficulties to do the things concretely." I see the "concern", (and not about Ukraine's future) but not "the front line".
So, all "It's that European politicians don't understand..." European Politicians are stupid, according to you. It is not that I disagree, but those are "big words", right?

I don't think it's useful to call politicians names. But, as I said, they don't understand, they don't know who the industry works and what are the technical and financial challenges linked to an increase in military production.
They don;t understand that certain things are impossible in the short term. Moreover they are not taking exceptional measures to boost this production.
It's not because they don't want but because they don't know how to proceed.

I'll give you another option, Putin declares War (and just freezes the conflict). Will an Ukraine at war join NATO?

That Putin never declare war to Ukraine is a good point: Ukraine not being at war could legaly join NATO. LOL.

Ok, but let's be serious. Joining NATO will take another few years. At least 5 years. Let's hope the war will end before.

 

[Ananda]

@Ananda Global markets are not controled by the US or by the West. Each country has their own banks and stock exchanges under their juridiction.

The reality is not like that. Each country in theory control their own market. However the mechanics of markets interconnect are control by large markets. The Global South simply want to have alternatives market mechanics connectivity that's not under Western politicians intervention.

Off course they can be under Chinese or Russian political intervention, but then again the market demands will come in. Whoever have less political intervention in the end can attract more demand and drive market depth. Simple as that, that's market competition afterall.

Yes it's still possible to transfer money in and out Russia from non sanctioning countries. But transfering profits or sales proceeds is another thing after you include the exchange rate and transfer fees. Using cryptos may be cheaper.

It's also one of the reasons why China, India and maybe other countries pay Russia with their own currency. The other reason is that they seize the occasion to rip off Russia.

You seems contradicting your opinion. Remember I put my comment to answer your opinion that taking capital and profit out of Russia is difficult. Then again you agree for countries that still have market connections with Russian market will not have problem to take their capital and profit from Russia. Something that I point out from my previous post. Glad you understand that.

don't think that the so called Global South is anxious about the domination of the West and of Western political whims. Their interrests are not incompatible with those of the West. That's why I don't like these two labels

If they are not anxious toward Western domination and political whims on the Market, then they will not have drive to find alternatives mechanism. Again what most Global South want is not discarding Western Market mechanics, but find alternatives to provide competition. Competition is good for market, make the Big Boys decisions makers become more careful to mix politics with pure market trade mechanics.

Life will be soon much better for the "global south" when the markets are under Chinese political control

If Yuan dominate market prove to be more reliable then USD-Euro dominate market, then the demand to that market will come automatically. On other hand if Yuan market prove sucks, then other players will left it.

That's call market competition. Hope you are not afraid and sour with competition in market dominance. That's what capitalism base on.

 

[Rob c]

@Rob c It's not true because every dollar spent on defence was first taken from the economy by the way of taxes

First of all, all government spending comes from the economy in the form of taxes or levies. This not a complete loss as you intimated as it is spent in the economy as part of the "money go around"
It does not disappear'. In a lot of government expenditure goes back into the economy, creating jobs and industries. As I pointed out before the money paid to military personnel goes back into the economy, plus there is a significant amount of supporting industries that benefit from defence contracts. There is also the equipment manufacturers that employ significant numbers of people and due to these contracts they are able to manufacture non military items more efficiently and cheaper.
The money paid to workers, keeps supermarkets viable in their area plus everything else like motor garages, restaurants, doctors, dentists and many other enterprises.
To think that the money just disappears or is wasted is very simplistic.
As rather small obscure item, my country (NZ) entered WW2 almost broke due to the great depression. Due to the goods an services it provided to the allied powers it ended the war with one of the higher GDP's around even though over 35% of the budget was being spent on the military.

 

[KipPotapych]

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.

This is a complete nonsense.

There are numerous studies that generally conclude that military spending is a drain on the economy. Furthermore, investment in many other industries creates more jobs and provides better dollar returns, and of course direct and (often) measurable contribution to the society as a whole. However, to say that military spending is not valuable is completely wrong and shortsighted.

For instance, the most obvious value is that it defends the nation! The very equipment that “rots in your own arsenal” brings significantly more than nothing. It provides deterrence and capability to defend yourself when the manure hits the fan. Gradual nominal investment in the MIC provides for sustained economic development and security, without which the former is not possible. In other words, regardless of how “draining” the military spending is, it is necessary for any sovereign nation and its economic development as the two are inseparable in the long term. The question of balance is debatable and would clearly vary among different countries, which is one of the reasons for the alliances. One cannot accumulate wealth without military spending because there will always be someone who does spend on military and will outright take your stuff every time. It is always more prudent to spend gradually over time than when actually necessary (though the premise itself makes it an ongoing necessity). No different from savings: you want to gradually save for a rainy day instead of having to sell your house (possibly for less than the mortgage is worth as it often happens in the hard times, nationally speaking) and end up on the street. I believe this is trivial and to tie it to the topic of this thread, ask Ukraine.

In addition, military spending may promote further wealth growth by projecting your influence way beyond your borders and geopolitics is extremely important. I believe this is also trivial.

I don’t think the US in the WW2 was an appropriate comparison. In fact, United States is probably not an appropriate comparison to the most of the world. One of the biggest countries on the planet, yet it only borders two other states on land. This puts it in a very advantageous position before most of everyone else. Their dollar spent on military has always gone further because, while spending more on the logistics, the development of these very logistics (arguably) led to more innovation, be it ship building, aviation, etc. They also, snd very importantly) have not seen a war with another state within their continental borders, as well as the destruction that it brings, for more than two centuries. This is due to the geographic location, as well as consistent military spending. And this, in turn, allowed for sustained and uninterrupted economic development. Note, when I say uninterrupted, I am not talking about economic cycle, rather externalities such as war. The WW2 and the USA comparison is also not appropriate because it basically made them the empire and powerhouse they are today. While other countries were bombarded (some places erased into the ground), the Americans were supplying them with all kinds of production, military and civilian. Many American companies were also collecting bank from the Germans as well. Quite a stimulus for the economy; like no other, in fact. Of course, WW2 has also allowed for the American dollar to become the world’s leading (reserve) currency, and so on. All (or a great deal of) this was due to the military spending, but in entirely different setting.

Other value of military spending comes through innovation, of course. Internet and GPS immediately come to mind, and both emerged without active warfare between the competing states.

Rob c is correct: to say that military spending is not valuable is just bizarre. I would like to point out the irony of stating so on the “defence talk” forum, haha.

As related directly to Rob’s points and Russia in this particular situation, very briefly:

Without a doubt, it puts a lot of money back into the economy in Russia. Suppliers, tool manufacturers, “trickle down” effect, etc. It makes the economy boom, really. Which is what is (maybe temporarily) happening in Russia, instead of a collapse, however artificial (this is not to be confused with the Russian economy “doing amazing or great” because this is not the case). There is a lot of money within and many benefit, likely many of those who hardly ever do too. However, the production is largely limited to the basic manufacturing sector. Technological components are imported at inflated prices and so is a lot of machinery, tools, etc. Likely unfavourable “partnership” deals with potential adversaries are made. Not just potential adversaries, but in general - deals that they probably would never make otherwise (my pure speculation).

Furthermore, the influx of substantial amounts of cash (government spending) into the economy, especially combined with decreased supply of various goods, “grey imports”, and so on leads to inflation in an already hot market (while Russia has not experienced as high inflation as the western world did during and post-Covid, they didn’t entirely avoid it). Shortage of labour only amplifies the problem. Interest rate is currently sitting at 19%, which is far from deadly for Russia historically, but still very high. Furthermore, to your point I mostly agree with, if you produce/refurbish/whatever 100 armoured vehicles, 40 of which are lost in an attack that didn’t gain anything short weeks later and most off he rest not long after, this creates a huge waste. In other words, wars are extremely expensive. The rewards, dictated by the outcome and its implications for the long run, would provide for further debate. Currently, there are no implications for any of it being “worth it” for any of the participants. Mostly losers, which I already stated several times in this thread.

I don't know how the GDP can increase more than the spending.

This is a very basic (yet complex) economic concept called a multiplier effect. For military spending, the multiplier is argued to be between 0.6 and 1.4 or so. In other words, every dollar spent on military contributes to $0.6-1.4 in economic growth. This is a measurable effect. We cannot measure most of the things I talked about above. Rob c referred to some study or media report that he saw a long time ago, which is consistent with the upper limit of the range cited above. However, this is an immediate impact on the economy of a state; medium- and long-run consequences are an entirely different animal and can be debated till one turns blue in the face but will not be known until some time in the future. See the WW2 and the United States as an extreme example.

It's always wise to maintain a military force in peace time but it's an expenditure, not an investment.

Would spending capital on the military industrial complex in post-Soviet Ukraine, instead of running it into the ground, selling all you can and more, be an expense or an investment? Is the current military spending in Europe and provision of military aid to Ukraine an expense or investment, though a great chunk of the said aid burns in Ukraine, just like the Russian armour does?

Again, this is nonsense. It is an investment into security and future prosperity.

Instead, spending in medical, educational and public transportations facilities and other public infrastructures are an investment.[…]

Infrastructures, like telecommunications, sewage, street, road, train…

Yes, many of those have higher measurable return on your investment and visibly benefit society. But none can simply exist without one’s ability to protect themselves. In the real world, that is. It’s unfortunate, but it is very real. All the facilities and infrastructure you mentioned may (one could argue that “will inevitably” would be more appropriate than “may”) be erased from existence without sufficient military spending. This is a historically proven fact. Ask Ukraine.

Military goods and facilities don't improve the economic environment.

Again, ask Ukraine.

Private companies don't use and don't benefit from the existence of a military base.

This is also false. There is a great number of private companies that greatly benefit from the existence of a military base. Many lobby for more to built. Some straight up lobby for war.

In the more general terms, see above. Private companies greatly benefit from the very existence of those bases. The very existence of the said private companies may depend on the existence of those bases and the equipment that rots within.

 

[KipPotapych]

Didn’t fit into the previous post:

Without a quote, I also strongly disagree with the premise of politicians lacking understanding how things work and why things don’t turn up immediately. First of all, random people discussing an issue on the internet pretending to know better and in a wide range of topics, to boot, from military strategy to government spending… I have no issue with me being thrown into that mix, by the way. Second, you are not talking about any individual person but a whole group of people with (usually substantial) experience and knowledge in various fields that contributes to the decision making. The subjects we are discussing are rather complex, especially in the mix. This is why you see individual politicians making strong statements that their offices (or they themselves) have to backtrack on later. So to say that some politician lacks understanding in how things work and this is why whatever is again shortsighted, especially when talking about trivial things as discussed in the posts above this one.

 

[seaspear]

This article goes into depth the economic crisis and corresponding arms race pre ww2 ,if there are shades of this in Russia its not surprising

https://adamtooze.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Tooze-Martin-Economics-of-War-Against-Hitler-CambHistWW2Vol3-1.pdf

 

[rsemmes]

@Fredled I am a bit confused now.
Are western economies suffering due to the war in Ukraine as I posted (even if only a 1% GDP) or is it all great news for western economies as GB MoD was already posting in 2023?

Ministry of Defence GB. @DefenceHQ
More than 200 highly-skilled jobs created in Wales and England
Eight-fold increase in 155mm ammunition production
Great news for @BritishArmy and GB manufacturing
We have signed new contracts with @BAESystemsplc for munitions.

x.com

x.com

That would mean "great news" for Russia too, right? At least, a bit of "great news" for MoD Russia, right? Not a full "great news" because Russia is at war.

 

[Redshift]

The reality is not like that. Each country in theory control their own market. However the mechanics of markets interconnect are control by large markets. The Global South simply want to have alternatives market mechanics connectivity that's not under Western politicians intervention.

Off course they can be under Chinese or Russian political intervention, but then again the market demands will come in. Whoever have less political intervention in the end can attract more demand and drive market depth. Simple as that, that's market competition afterall.




You seems contradicting your opinion. Remember I put my comment to answer your opinion that taking capital and profit out of Russia is difficult. Then again you agree for countries that still have market connections with Russian market will not have problem to take their capital and profit from Russia. Something that I point out from my previous post. Glad you understand that.



If they are not anxious toward Western domination and political whims on the Market, then they will not have drive to find alternatives mechanism. Again what most Global South want is not discarding Western Market mechanics, but find alternatives to provide competition. Competition is good for market, make the Big Boys decisions makers become more careful to mix politics with pure market trade mechanics.




If Yuan dominate market prove to be more reliable then USD-Euro dominate market, then the demand to that market will come automatically. On other hand if Yuan market prove sucks, then other players will left it.

That's call market competition. Hope you are not afraid and sour with competition in market dominance. That's what capitalism base on.

@Fredled I am a bit confused now.
Are western economies suffering due to the war in Ukraine as I posted (even if only a 1% GDP) or is it all great news for western economies as GB MoD was already posting in 2023?

Ministry of Defence GB. @DefenceHQ
More than 200 highly-skilled jobs created in Wales and England
Eight-fold increase in 155mm ammunition production
Great news for @BritishArmy and GB manufacturing
We have signed new contracts with @BAESystemsplc for munitions.

x.com

x.com

That would mean "great news" for Russia too, right? At least, a bit of "great news" for MoD Russia, right? Not a full "great news" because Russia is at war.

I would suggest that you don't read UK MoD (or any other countries MoD) posts about the Economy with too much seriousness, that's not really their remit.

 

[rsemmes]

Even more confused...

Russia Could Be Able to Attack NATO by 2030: German Intelligence
“In terms of personnel and material, Russian armed forces are likely to be capable of carrying out an attack against NATO by the end of the decade at the latest,” BND foreign intelligence chief Bruno Kahl told a parliamentary hearing. And “Whether we like it or not, we are in a direct confrontation with Russia”.

Russia Could Be Able to Attack NATO by 2030: German Intelligence

Russia will likely be capable of attacking NATO by 2030 and is ramping up efforts to disrupt Ukraine's Western supporters, German intelligence chiefs warned.

thedefensepost.com

But: BND warnt vor direkter militärischer Bedrohung... direkten Auseinandersetzung.

Geheimdienste warnen vor zunehmender russischer Aktivität

Die deutschen Geheimdienste beobachten ein "aggressives Agieren russischer Nachrichtendienste". Insbesondere Spionage und Sabotage nähmen zu. Die Spitzen der deutschen Geheimdienste stellten nun klare Forderungen an die Politik.

www.br.de

That after the collapse of Russian economy in 2025 or 2026, at most. More appropriately, how terrible is the situation of the Russian AF, according to the BND, if Russia could attack NATO in six years?
I am also amused by the use of "Auseinandersetzung/confrontation". (I cannot speak German.)

 

[Redlands18]

Ukraine to receive aging Abrams tanks in latest Australian military aid package - ABC News
Ukraine is to get 49 ex Australian Army M-1A1 Abrams in a package worth $245m. Australia is currently replacing them with the M-1A2 SEPv3 model.

 

[rsemmes]

Victory Plan: NATO.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/16/europe/zelensky-ukraine-victory-plan/index.html

 

[Feanor]

Victory Plan: NATO.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/16/europe/zelensky-ukraine-victory-plan/index.html

Posting links with no commentary is against the forum rules. If you want to discuss this plan, please take the time to provide some input of your own.

 

[rsemmes]

Sorry, it's just that that is the whole plan.

Join NATO.
More weapons from NATO.
NATO shooting down Russian missiles over Ukraine.
A NATO deterrence force in Ukraine.
More NATO money after war.
And the only thing he, Zelensky, can actually do: try to hold the Anzio-bridgehead in Kursk.
(If he gets enough NATO weapons to do it).

There are 3 secret points, but apart from that, the Plan is: NATO.

 

[Feanor]

Sorry, it's just that that is the whole plan.

Join NATO.
More weapons from NATO.
NATO shooting down Russian missiles over Ukraine.
A NATO deterrence force in Ukraine.
More NATO money after war.
And the only thing he, Zelensky, can actually do: try to hold the Anzio-bridgehead in Kursk.
(If he gets enough NATO weapons to do it).

There are 3 secret points, but apart from that, the Plan is: NATO.

The issue isn't that you didn't list the plan's points. The issue is that you provided nothing of substance of your own. Do you have some sort of comment regarding this plan? Is there something to discuss here?

For example, I think this plan shows that Ukrainian leadership is in a strategic dead end. They're hoping for someone else to come in and save them. They're still not willing to negotiate with Russia but they don't have a way to actually win the war and are just hoping the west will rescue them. This is an example of commentary.

 

[Feanor]

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.

If you don't have evidence, then you need to retract the claim or explain how you arrived at that figure.

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.

Sure. Questioned, agreed. Collapsed? It's not wrong to express doubts about the state of the Russian economy. And Russia has problems. But there is a huge difference between "questionable" and "collapsed". One is a reasonable doubt based on available information. The other is unsubstantiated garbage at odds with the information we actually have available to us.

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?

I do not believe them and I do not have evidence what they say is true. None of this equates an economic collapse or even a recession.

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.

I don't think anyone on here has denied that this war has hurt Russia economically. You are intentionally equivocating.

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.

Untrue. You by definition only do it at a rate that makes sense.

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.

I was being sarcastic. Again none of this is relevant to the question of whether the Russian economy is currently collapsed.

That would be something! However that would have to be coordinated with Moldova and at Moldova's demand because it's Moldav land.
That would be another nice way to put immobilized troops in action. if Transnistria is freed from Russian osupation, they can reduce the number of troops there.
Unfortunaltely, I don't think Ukrainians have such a plan or that they have even remotely the necessary ressources for that.

Good question. Ukraine didn't have the resources for Kursk but did it anyway. Russian presence in Transnestria is rather small and certainly would not be the main obstacle to the invasion. It would be a combination of getting Moldova and western partners to sign off on this, and it would require fighting the Transnestrians themselves who have considerably more men under arms then the rather token Russian deployment there.

Satellite pictures show 8 tanks burning. But 2, 5, 8 or 10 that's not the point. The point is that Ukrainian hit Russian bases regularly with inreased effectiveness.

Is it increased? I see spurts of strikes that tend to get through partially. This has been going on for a while.

They are also supplying new barrels to replace the used ones. Indication that few Ceasars have been destroyed or lost. Ukrainians are using barrels well above the recomended limit without losing acuracy.

I think Caesars and PzH-2000s are the most survivable howitzers of the war. One could argue that the 2S34 Mal'va is also rare hit, and there are very few of those too, but I think they're not being used as actively or for nearly as long.

Because the radar and the computers are the most expensive parts.

If you can only hit a couple of targets, sure. But I think it would be worthwhile for Russia to expend Iskanders on Patriot TELs.