The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[SinisterMinister]

I am amazed by the people that come out of the woodwork and claim the things were incredibly foreseeable after the event yet failed to speak up a significant time prior to the event. The reality is that prior to an event that the future possibilities are endless and politicians as well as the general public don't want the status quo to be disturbed until there is no other option.
In regard to the invasion of Ukraine, the time available for the political machine to first of all react and acknowledge there was a problem (which takes considerable time in a democracy) and actually do something was insufficient to achieve anything meaningful.
History shows us that while hindsight is very good at showing up our failings, foresight is consistently dogged with failings.

Something I wrote elsewhere on April 25, 2022

"What I think most people don’t take seriously is the idea of a general Russian mobilization. I think that is something we should very much take seriously. This is an existential crisis for Putin’s Russia. If we take seriously that he will not accept defeat, we should be getting more and more nervous about how prolonging his victory changes his calculus for just what constitutes victory"

Now I don't expect you to believe me, but that is by the by; I was far, far from the only person who thought the Russians would mobilize. Mobilization + ramping up of military industrial complex + import of arms from friendly nations are perhaps the most foreseeable events in war, especially a war like this one. But sure, future possibilities are endless. Who could have known the Russians were actually serious about fighting a war and not just LARPing?

 

[Fredled]

Russian forces are positioned approximately 2.5 to 3 kilometers from Kupiansk
According to Ukrainian source. The way Siniehubov talks show that the town could fall earlier than Pokrovsk.
_______________________

It was a joke to ridicule Putin's heavy losses of tanks. Now it became reality:

The most likely explanation from milbloggers is that they will use it for training. But how good a training can be on WW2 machines?

The second surprise is that Russians were keeping T34 tanks, not only on pedestals and in museums, but also in storage for future use until these days.
Technically it can provide an inexpensive solution if they can retrofit them with new engines. But it would still be quite a shame for the crews to be given such a tanks to fight in Ukraine.
________________________

Are you suggesting it is somehow better to be a European politician than an Asian one?

No. Not at all. I think Chinese, and Asians in general, are very intelligent people, including their politicians. Of course, Xi bets on the wrong horse with Russia, but in the short term, he does great deals.
Putin is an Asian politician and Russia is become more and Asian country like Uzbekistan than an European country. Putin opened the gates to let the Mongols' Golden Horde inside Russia again. Not on horseback, but economically. In 5 years, China will own most of the profitable industry (even better: they are going to make it profitable), and will have troops stationed in Russia. The highest treason in Russian history. Korean troops are just a symbolic start.

You mean until a peace agreement says otherwise.

Ceding territories as a result from a brutal military invasion and the blackmail of further bombing is not a peace agreement, it's land theft. How can it be a basis for peace and future good relations?

The offer to return territories, that you never saw, was two months after "invading the country".

To return the territories? It was the condition set forth by the Ukrainians to start talking that Russian withdrew their troops. Then Russian said that they offered this. LOL.

 

[Feanor]

Russian forces are positioned approximately 2.5 to 3 kilometers from Kupiansk
According to Ukrainian source. The way Siniehubov talks show that the town could fall earlier than Pokrovsk.

Unless Ukraine is doing really badly there, Kupyansk should be very defendable. The Oskol runs right through the center of the town. Of course Russia hasn't really been moving on Pokrovsk either, unlike Kupyansk where Russia is very much preparing to try and taken the town

It was a joke to ridicule Putin's heavy losses of tanks. Now it became reality:

The most likely explanation from milbloggers is that they will use it for training. But how good a training can be on WW2 machines?

The second surprise is that Russians were keeping T34 tanks, not only on pedestals and in museums, but also in storage for future use until these days.
Technically it can provide an inexpensive solution if they can retrofit them with new engines. But it would still be quite a shame for the crews to be given such a tanks to fight in Ukraine.

Russia has a set of Czechoslovak made T-34-85s that they imported from Laos and use for parades. Which is a bit of a giveaway that there are no substantial quantities of these vehicles in storage. If there were they wouldn't have had to re-import from Laos to use for parades in Russia. You'll notice OSINT storage base counts don't tend to include T-34s, JS-3s, or the SU/JSU family of SPGs. Personally I'm skeptical. Then again it's October and parade vehicles don't usually start getting pulled out until more like February. Maybe they're heading to a factory for repairs? Unclear. Eitherway there shouldn't be substantial quantities of any of these vehicles in inventory.

Ceding territories as a result from a brutal military invasion and the blackmail of further bombing is not a peace agreement, it's land theft. How can it be a basis for peace and future good relations?

You think Russia and Ukraine will have good relations?

A peace agreement is what two sides agree to as part of ending the war. Historically it has often involved territory changing hands. Some of those peace agreements lasted and some didn't. It remains to be seen what this looks like here.

To return the territories? It was the condition set forth by the Ukrainians to start talking that Russian withdrew their troops. Then Russian said that they offered this. LOL.

At the time of the Istanbul deal the terms of the deal included Russia returning territory. You're playing word games and it appears intentionally conflating different parts of their statements. Ukraine had a deal on the table that involved a return to February '22 borders with recognition of what they didn't have as lost, and a neutrality clause, as well as clauses that limited Ukraine's military in size and limited what forces Russia could deploy or station near Ukraine with a verification mechanism. I believe this is the full text in English with some portions marked as still under discussion when the talks broke down. Note the date on the draft in question.

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/a456d6dd8e27e830/e279a252-full.pdf

 

[rsemmes]

When Russia took the first houses in Vugledar, I read a comment about the coming fall of Novoukrainka and Bogoiavlenka; I thought that was very optimistic. Now, the crumbling front seems to go from Iasna Poliana to Eliszavetivka and I still read too much optimism about the Ukrainian situation.

North Korea sends more than 9m artillery shells to Russia, South says

Japanese-made chips used in missiles in Ukraine war, analysis shows

asia.nikkei.com

"The number was provided by the South Korean Defense Intelligence Agency in a written response to a lawmaker's question.
...monitoring shipping activities via satellite... more than 20,000 containers to Russia. If 152-mm shells: 9.4 million shells.
If the updated number is accurate, it means 1 million per month. EU set a goal of 1 million rounds per year."

Even if only half of that, it means 10.000 extra shells a day (and change) for that crumbling front; that will make a difference this year, and next year.


If Putin said that as long as there are Ukrainian troops in Russia he will not negotiate, he got himself the perfect excuse to #not negotiate; forcing Zelensky to make a move. Of course, it's just a statement.

"No matter how Crimea ended up belonging to Ukraine..."
I think @Fredled made his point quite clear.

 

[Ananda]

Of course, Xi bets on the wrong horse with Russia, but in the short term, he does great deals.
Putin is an Asian politician and Russia is become more and Asian country like Uzbekistan than an European country. Putin opened the gates to let the Mongols' Golden Horde inside Russia again. Not on horseback, but economically. In 5 years, China will own most of the profitable industry (even better: they are going to make it profitable), and will have troops stationed in Russia. The highest treason in Russian history. Korean troops are just a symbolic start.

Bit contradict on that. At one side you say Xi Bet Wrong Horse with Putin, and other side you say Putin open door for China to own everything on Russia. By that logic Xi is beting the right horse with Putin.

Off course saying China will own everything on Russia is sideling the fact that what China did is mostly replacing Western Investor. China brands and products replacing western ones. China Investment on Russian oil, gas and commodities just replacing Western ones that left and later on forcefully kicked out by Russian.

China and in smaller extent India and Middle East capital just replacing Western ones, as Russia still need external capitals. Some Russian oil rigs instead previously has Western Owners now has Chinese owners. For Russian it is nothing substansial as it is only changes on Internasional investors.

However not this means China will own everything. Like cars, when Renault left Russia,it is Russian brand Moskvitch that take over. Russian brand still make nearly 40% of new car sales, Chinese brands around 50% and the rest is mostly Japanese, Korean and Euro brand that still come from grey imports. Means Chinese brands only take over the Euro, Korean and Japanese brands that use to have more than half of Russian auto market.

They just change Euro hordes to Chinese hordes, and that doesn't mean China will own everything.

Add:
Kim's soldiers so far only Ukrainian and Western sources that said it will be deployed toward Ukrainian war. Saying that as prelude toward Chinese Soldiers stationed in Russia is really not related.

 

[Feanor]

Bit contradict on that. At one side you say Xi Bet Wrong Horse with Putin, and other side you say Putin open door for China to own everything on Russia. By that logic Xi is beting the right horse with Putin.

Off course saying China will own everything on Russia is sideling the fact that what China did is mostly replacing Western Investor. China brands and products replacing western ones. China Investment on Russian oil, gas and commodities just replacing Western ones that left and later on forcefully kicked out by Russian.

China and in smaller extent India and Middle East capital just replacing Western ones, as Russia still need external capitals. Some Russian oil rigs instead previously has Western Owners now has Chinese owners. For Russian it is nothing substansial as it is only changes on Internasional investors.

However not this means China will own everything. Like cars, when Renault left Russia,it is Russian brand Moscovitch that take over. Russian brand still make nearly 40% of new car sales, Chinese brands around 50% and the rest is mostly Japanese, Korean and Euro brand that still come from grey imports. Means Chinese brands only take over the Euro, Korean and Japanese brands that use to have more than half of Russian auto market.

They just change Euro hordes to Chinese hordes, and that doesn't mean China will own everything.

Except the new Moskvitch appears to be a re-labeled Chinese product not a domestic development or a meaningful sequel to the well known Soviet brand.

 

[Ananda]

Moskvitch appears to be a re-labeled Chinese product not a domestic development or a meaningful sequel to the well known Soviet brand.

Agree it is basically using Chinese JAC JAC MOTORS as Moskvitch basically buy the license from JAC and JAC provide components even jig tools in previous Renault facilities. However the ownership as far as I know still with Moscow City Government.

Renault sold their shares to Moscow government French carmaker Renault to sell Russian operations to Moscow but still open option to return later on. JAC is not the owner of the facility or Moskvitch brand, they so far just suppliers of components.

This shown in the context of China will own everything in Russia, because of the war. It is just not true. On matter of Russian import substitution strategy, Russia either substitute the foreign investors or replace Euro ones with their own.

 

[KipPotapych]

I don't remember Putin or other Russian officials as saying that they will stop long range bombing to start the negotiations, let alone that they had done it.
Even if they said something remotely like this, they didn't do it. As long as they don't do it, Ukraine will defend herself and will still bombards and attack Russia with all possible means.

Some revelations today.

Does everyone remember that last fall there was an expectation of the barrages of drones and missiles to start plummeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure before or during early winter, yet no such major strikes occurred until about February and everyone said “well, here it is”? Today we may have an answer as to why the Russians never acted in late fall and early to mid winter. We now also have an additional (if not the main) explanation to the Americans asking Ukraine to stop attacking Russian refineries, hydrocarbons storage facilities, and other energy related infrastructure. Post on X by the FT man:

Article in question: Ukraine and Russia in talks about halting strikes on energy plants

I am now thinking that maybe, although planned, I didn’t provide any reference for the talks and Russia quitting the talks about the strikes on the UA energy infrastructure after the Kursk invasion. I believe the X post above and the article should be satisfactory for such citation:

Kyiv was seeking to resume Qatar-mediated negotiations that came close to agreement in August before being derailed by Ukraine’s invasion of Kursk, said the people, who included senior Ukrainian officials.[…]

The Kursk invasion led to Moscow pulling out from a previous round of talks in August just as officials began planning an in-person meeting in Doha.

Qatar had started mediating those negotiations in June after Zelenskyy held a peace summit in Switzerland — to which Russia was not invited.

If I recall correctly, I said Turkey in my previous post, but it is Qatar that was the mediator. Now to the revelations.

Other attempts to broker a deal have also foundered in the past. Four Ukrainian officials told the Financial Times that Kyiv and Moscow had come to a “tacit agreement” last autumn to not strike each other’s energy facilities.

As a result, Russia that winter refrained from the type of large-scale attacks it had conducted on Ukraine’s power infrastructure in 2022-23, according to two Ukrainian officials and a person in Washington with knowledge of the situation.

That agreement was meant to pave the way towards a formal deal, the people said.

I remember wondering last fall/winter (and earlier and I believe I talked about it here as well) why Russia was not taking out Ukraine’s generating capacity until it dis because that was the most logical progression. Many analysts were talking about it since at least mid (2023) fall, saying that Russia had accumulated a large stock of missiles and drones and was going to resume attacks on the Ukrainian energy grid. Little did we know, I guess. So what happened? Well, Ukraine, that can presumably be trusted to follow through on the agreements, happened:

However, Kyiv restarted drone attacks on Russia’s oil facilities in February and March this year, as it sought to increase pressure on Moscow after its failed 2023 counteroffensive.

Now it makes perfect sense why the American administration and top Pentagon officials were calling on Ukraine to stop the attacks on the Russian oil facilities. I never bought the arguments of the (mostly) social media lemmings that there is a great concern of oil prices increasing in the election year and fear of escalation. Reasonable person familiar with the subject matter would dismiss the former outright due to the global demand and production capacities, etc. Escalation was a real concern, but not the escalation the lemmings had referred to in this case. The escalation was what happened next.

Despite a warning from the White House to stop the strikes, Kyiv pressed ahead, and Moscow viewed the tacit agreement as having been broken, people familiar with the situation said.
Russia then escalated, unleashing barrages of long-range missiles aimed at power plants across Ukraine, including the Trypilska thermal power plant 40km from Kyiv, which was completely destroyed.[…]

Russia’s response to Kyiv’s attacks plunged much of Ukraine into temporary darkness and cut 9GW of power generation capacity — half of what Ukraine needed last year to get through winter. Kyiv has proved unable to fully restore this capacity.

What did Ukraine achieve in return? Frankly, not much. They exchanged about 50% of the country’s generating capacity for the relatively minor damage to the inflow of the Russian hydrocarbon related revenues as well as the means to continue to wage war.

Sergey Vakulenko at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center said that at the peak of the attacks in May, 17 per cent of Russia’s refining capacity was affected but that most of this had since been repaired.

Russia also exports a relatively small amount of refined oil products and the country’s refining capacity is more than double its fuel consumption.

The last paragraph is not entirely factual, in my opinion, and we can discuss it separately if someone would like, but the described timeline of events is logical and supported by the timeline of what actually happened. To me personally, it appears like another huge blunder by the Ukrainian decision makers. I also believe that this sufficiently addresses the lemming theory that Russia is no longer able to escalate the war within Ukraine that is talked about for a couple of years now.

I would also suggest that the western decision makers are smarter and more aware than some suggest. Definitely smarter than their Ukrainian counterparts, or so it appears. I am assuming Fredled will point out one thing or the other to suggest otherwise, but to me everything points to very poor decisions of a player with the loosing hand, the hand they cannot win, yet raising the bet in hope of who knows what (the other would fold?).

About the current talks.

“There’s very early talks about potentially restarting something,” said a diplomat briefed on the negotiations. “There’s now talks on the energy facilities.”

On the one hand, I do not see why Russia would agree to any such potential deal. First, they are undeniably winning on the battlefield and if they instead keep the pressure on the energy grid through the winter, it would surely help their effort and the civilian population of Ukraine, seeing crumbling frontline and physical loss of more territories, inability to counter these losses in any meaningful way, and so on, would likely put additional pressure on Zelensky to negotiate and speed up the inevitable. Second, it is clear as day, according to the report, that Russians had held their part of the agreement last fall/winter, while Ukraine failed to do the same. Who is to say that Ukraine would not repeat their course of actions: wait out the winter months and then resume their unproductive thing? The fact that Russia had returned to these talks in the summer is somewhat semi-amazing on its own (until Ukraine invaded Kursk). Third, it appears that production of military equipment in Ukraine is increasing and it, of course, requires a great deal of energy generation capacity, so Russia would want to keep these capabilities to a minimum.

On the other hand, however, Russia has very little to lose doing so. First, the electricity generation capacity in Ukraine is down by half or there about and there is no simple solution to fix the problem - it will take many years. Second, they are indicating they are willing to talk while still doing their thing on the frontline. In other words, they would be doing what Fredled suggested: stop sending missiles in order to show willingness to negotiate. Third, they can actually escalate it further and blame Ukraine for it if things fall through. If that was the case, Russia would also further demonstrate that it is Ukraine that refuses to negotiate. To run ahead, I do realize that there is very little leverage, if any at all, that Ukraine has and Russia would not allow for much leeway either. This has nothing to do with “fairness” and “justice” though, but reality. Regardless, there is mot much hope for anything to happen anyway:

But Putin is unlikely to agree a deal until Russia’s forces oust Ukrainian troops from its Kursk region, where they still control about 600 sq km of territory, according to a former senior Kremlin official briefed on the talks.

“As long as the [Ukrainians] are trampling the land in Kursk, Putin will hit Zelenskyy’s energy infrastructure,” the person said.

Ukraine nevertheless plans to keep striking targets, including oil refineries, to pressure Russia into the talks, according to the senior Ukrainian official.

That’s also the (reported) reality and we get to discuss this war in this thread just that much longer.

Edit: To insert a bit of humour that Gen. Ben Hodges provided yesterday. Here is him:



Here is the reality:



Both posts are from yesterday, minutes apart.

 

[rsemmes]

Within the next 3 months, Ukraine plans to refill its ranks up to an 85%. (160.000 men).

L'Ukraine annonce la mobilisation de 160 000 hommes face aux avancées russes

Face aux avancées russes dans la région de Pokrovsk et au déploiement de troupes nord-coréennes par Moscou, l'Ukraine a annoncé mardi une nouvelle mobilisation de 160 000 hommes.

www.france24.com

We have to add a 3 months training, then, are they going to be 25 years old men or 50 years old? Zelensky already got the money and the equipment for them? Equipment goes from boots and rifles, to AD, tanks, vehicles, mechanics and hospitals (doctors and medical supplies). A 1.000 brigade may have enough with 4 howitzers, or 12, a 5.000 men bde may need more than that. Zelensky complained (Zaluhzny) about lack of money and equipment for thousands of new recruits; and he is still complaining.
There will be a strong (in men, at least) defence line in summer 2025.

 

[Fredled]

At the time of the Istanbul deal the terms of the deal included Russia returning territory. You're playing word games and it appears intentionally conflating different parts of their statements. Ukraine had a deal on the table that involved a return to February '22 borders with recognition of what they didn't have as lost.....
..... I believe this is the full text in English with some portions marked as still under discussion when the talks broke down. Note the date on the draft in question.

This draft is terribly incomplete (and that's what I heard about it before, without being able to provide evidence LOL.). First of all, it doesn't contain any geographic description of the new border both parties were supposed to agree with.
You will notice that the word "the map" is marked as not agreed upon by Ukraine, indicating that they were no agreement yet on this subject.

That's very strange for a deal that was ready to be signed until Boris Johnson suddenly showed up to stop the hand holding the pen. Territorial negotiations can take months, and is the essential part of any peace agreement. Saying "to the 2022 borders" is only a speculation since their is no such mention in the draft and no such a thing as "2022 borders" as they always have been contested since 2014. It only mentions a "map" that is not joined with the document and which Ukraine didn't agree with at that time.

The draft only talk about Ukraine not being engaged in any military alliance with other countries. And Ukraine agreed about this principle.
Everybody thinks about NATO. In fact, the reason why Ukraine agreed with it is that it works both ways: Russia will also be forbidden to forge a military alliance with Ukraine, and more importantly, to station troops inside Ukraine. In other words, it prevents the type of alliance which exists between Russia and Belarus. Neutrality means also that they can't be allied with Russia. NATO is not mentioned in the draft.

The second thing that the draft talks about is the limitation of the Ukrainian military. Here again, the Ukrainians didn't agree with the numbers. My conclusion is that this draft was far from being ready to be signed as the rumours goes.

You think Russia and Ukraine will have good relations?

It's like asking in 1942 if Poland will ever have good relations with Germany.
Today, they have good relations. So, everything is possible. In the modern world, good relations are always more profitable than bad relations.

Bit contradict on that. At one side you say Xi Bet Wrong Horse with Putin, and other side you say Putin open door for China to own everything on Russia. By that logic Xi is betting the right horse with Putin.

Short term and long term projections are often contradictory.

China seemed to have made a long term decision related to The Eternal Friendship with Russia. (Eternal is quiet long term). And, as things unfolded, China benefits from several opportunities thanks to the war in Ukraine and various sanctions imposed on Russia.
I didn't say that China will own everything in Russia. I said that they will own all the profitable non-petroleum industries.

These are short term benefits whereas they are publicly boasting an alliance with the wrong guy. Americans, and Trump in particular, but Joe Biden too, are a little bit responsible for that. But it's still the wrong guy to be allied with. I already said, that there can't be anything good out of a friendship with someone who is attacking his neighbours with missiles and tanks. Putin is going to lose against the West and his regime will collapse by internal discontent. Putin himself plays another bad horse with Iran. It's only a matter of when, not if, his regime will collapse. Simply because he takes the wrong decisions.

Kyiv and Moscow had come to a “tacit agreement” last autumn to not strike each other’s energy facilities.

I don't remember that Russian had stopped bombing Ukraine with long range missile at any moment in the whole time line. By the end of 2022, Russia had already used one third of its missile arsenal and two thirds of its advanced missiles.
Maybe they didn't strike energy infrastructures, but they stroke everything else.
That Russians would not have attacked energy facilities had Ukrainians not struck oil depots or refineries in Russia is ridiculous. Of course it's what Putin says every time he commits a war crime: That it's in retaliation for something.
The only reason why they bombed not earlier than February was that they needed time to replenish their stock of missiles. Ukrainians even predicted when the next massive attack will be by the rate of Russian missile production.

In fact Ukraine strikes Russia anytime it can, anywhere it can with all the means available, as soon as there are available. They don't care about tacit agreements, red lines or any other consideration but their survival. Even better: If they know that something will cause Putin's anger, they will do it because it means that it's effective.

We have to add a 3 months training, then, are they going to be 25 years old men or 50 years old? Zelensky already got the money and the equipment for them?

That's the main reason why young Ukrainians don't want to enlist. There is no decent weapons to fight with. And I suspect that the pay is also too low.
I also heard that Ukraine has dozen of tank crews but no tank for them. People don't want to fight with rusted riffles and no body armour.

 

[rsemmes]

That's the main reason why young Ukrainians don't want to enlist. There is no decent weapons to fight with. And I suspect that the pay is also too low.
I also heard that Ukraine has dozen of tank crews but no tank for them. People don't want to fight with rusted riffles and no body armour.

Not even Leopard 1? Dozen of crews in this war is nothing. Usually, in wars, what people "want" to do is irrelevant.
What you are not doing is asking the question: Why Zelensky wants to fight?

 

[KipPotapych]

I don't remember that Russian had stopped bombing Ukraine with long range missile at any moment in the whole time line.

They didn’t and they won’t until their goals are (maybe near) reached. That would be a ridiculous strategy. The goals may also shift and expand as the situation evolves and marginal costs are deemed to be below marginal benefits.

Maybe they didn't strike energy infrastructures, but they stroke everything else.

This is because the agreement was in relation to energy infrastructure in particular.

That Russians would not have attacked energy facilities had Ukrainians not struck oil depots or refineries in Russia is ridiculous. Of course it's what Putin says every time he commits a war crime: That it's in retaliation for something.

This is exactly what happened as outlined in the article citing both Ukrainian and US officials.

The only reason why they bombed not earlier than February was that they needed time to replenish their stock of missiles. Ukrainians even predicted when the next massive attack will be by the rate of Russian missile production.

You are contradicting what had already happened and we know about and most everyone credible on this subject.

In fact Ukraine strikes Russia anytime it can, anywhere it can with all the means available, as soon as there are available. They don't care about tacit agreements, red lines or any other consideration but their survival. Even better: If they know that something will cause Putin's anger, they will do it because it means that it's effective.

It says right in the article and I quoted those parts that they exchanged half of their power generating capacity that will take years to rebuild for about 17% of the Russian refinery capacity most of which was quickly restored, as reported. If you think that is effective, I have no issues with that.


It was reported a few days ago by numerous media outlets (I think someone may have cited it here as well) that Rheinmetall had started building Lynx IFVs in Ukraine. I had my doubts since this is not some repair shop but rather a complex process and I thought it was very unlikely that this is actually happening. The reports were citing Ukrainian sources and Papperger’s interview dubbed in Ukrainian. The interview surfaced in English now and voila… No such thing is taking place.



Source: x.com. The video is embedded in the post. The “alternative facts” are getting to the point if complete... I actually don’t even know what to call it anymore.


A couple of nice looking maps:




Source: x.com

A map with fortifications:



Source: x.com

On this note and the map above, I saw some suggesting that Ukrainians have built a trap and Russians are walking right into it. The theory is that Ukrainians are waiting for the Russians to stretch thin and then attack and win the war, basically. Imagine seeing that when looking at the map above!

Within the next 3 months, Ukraine plans to refill its ranks up to an 85%. (160.000 men).

Despite a new mobilisation law that took effect in May, the army, outside a handful of brigades, has struggled to recruit enough replacements, with young men reluctant to sign up to tours of duty that are at best indefinite and, at worst, one-way missions. Western partners are privately urging Ukraine’s leaders to lower the mobilisation age floor from 25 to increase the potential pool of recruits. But political sensitivities and fears over an already alarming demographic crisis stand in the way of any change.

Ukraine is now struggling to survive, not to win

Russia is slicing through Ukrainian defences in parts of the battlefield

www.economist.com

From the same article:

The gloomy mood is evident in a shift in America’s language. Senior officials like Mr Austin still strike a confident note, promising that Ukraine will win. Those involved in the guts of planning in the Pentagon say that, in practice, the ambitions of early 2023—a Ukrainian force that could take back its territory or shock Russia into talks through a well-crafted armoured punch—have given way to a narrow focus on preventing defeat. “At this point we are thinking more and more about how Ukraine can survive,” says a person involved in that planning. Others put it more delicately. “The next several months”, noted Jim O’Brien, the State Department’s top Europe official, at a conference in Riga on October 19th, “are an opportunity for us to reaffirm that Ukraine can stay on the battlefield for the next couple of years.”

 

[KipPotapych]

Fredled, you appear to be extremely confident in your expertise, assessments, and conclusions, as well as your sources. I would strongly advise you (and everyone else, really) to spare 30 minutes of your time and watch/listen to this interview (rather a discussion) with Mark Galeotti (of RUSI and other think tanks and academic organizations) by Vlad Vexler:

It is really rather great and well worth 30 minutes of anyone’s time.

 

[Feanor]

A couple of nice looking maps:

View attachment 51964
View attachment 51967

Source: x.com

A map with fortifications:

View attachment 51966

Source: x.com

Those maps are already out of date when posted, Kurakhovka has fallen.

On this note and the map above, I saw some suggesting that Ukrainians have built a trap and Russians are walking right into it. The theory is that Ukrainians are waiting for the Russians to stretch thin and then attack and win the war, basically. Imagine seeing that when looking at the map above!

Well what's the alternative? Admit Ukraine is losing? Anything but that, surely.

 

[KipPotapych]

Those maps are already out of date when posted, Kurakhovka has fallen.

I don’t doubt it. Although the first two were posted 13 hours ago likely based on the data already dated (?), and the third was posted 37.5 hours ago and cited for the visuals of fortifications.

Well what's the alternative? Admit Ukraine is losing? Anything but that, surely.

Mind works in mysterious ways or something like that.

 

[Fredled]

On the front, the two most worrying events are:
1/ The advance and solidification of the Russian position on Oksil river south of Kupiansk. (I posted the picture in a previous post. Ukrainians haven't repelled the Russians from this position since.

2/ The rapid advance north-west of Vuhledar and in the direction of Kurakove. It was predicted that their advance will be faster after the fall of Vuhledar. This is now confirmed by the facts.

The positive or half-positive notes are:
1/ The Russian advance on Pokrovsk, Toresk and Chasiv Yar have been stopped, at least temporarily.
(Ukrainians claim that Russians still didn't manage to cross the chanel in significant numbers)

2/ The same in the Kursk Region were Ukrainians are still actively counter attacking.

3/ Strikes deep into Russian Territory continues. Two days ago they hit the Spetznatz Academy near Grozny.
It's possible, IMO, that they had help from locals as some Chechen are still opposed to the Russian allegiance.
An important number of Chechens are fighting on the side of Ukraine.
___________________

t says right in the article and I quoted those parts that they exchanged half of their power generating capacity that will take years to rebuild for about 17% of the Russian refinery capacity most of which was quickly restored

No, they didn't make an exchange. Ukrainians struck the oil depots and refineries which were supplying the military. This created an increase in the cost of fuel for the military and civilians by 10% and complicated logistic.
Of course te Ukrianian strikes were not large scale enough to have a visible effect on the battlefield but not doing this elementary thing would have been stupid.
Since then, Ukrainians have continuously struck fuel depots. Refineries, less so, probably because they noticed that the damages were not enough to disrupt production in the long term. Yet recently, they struck alcohol distilleries which produce additives for fighter-bomber jet fuel.

This is what you have to do if you want to win a war. Maybe, if I believe this article, Putin let the Ukrainians know that he won't bomb poser plant if they don't bomb refineries, knowing that if they don't bomb refineries he will win the war. Ukrainians didn't fall in the trap.
If it was 100% safe that Russians won't strike power lines and power plants, the Ukrainians would not have done that. Obviously they didn't believe it 100%.

Putin used the strikes on refineries as a pretext. In fact, the Ukrainians didn't target electric power infrastructures, while the Russians did. If we are talking about the electrical grid, then, the Russians broke the tacit deal.
And they did with disproportionate power in the context of punishment for attacks by a few drones.

But, if you believe that the article describe the facts accurately, I have no issue with that.

Fredled, you appear to be extremely confident in your expertise, assessments, and conclusions, as well as your sources. I would strongly advise you (and everyone else, really) to spare 30 minutes of your time and watch/listen to this interview (rather a discussion) with Mark Galeotti

Nice video. I already listened to him on Ukraine a couple of weeks ago.
What I write here is my opinion, not an attempt at expertise.

 

[Fredled]

Interview of a Chechen fighting on the side of Ukraine. The introduction is in French, but the interview is in English. Just skip the beginning of the video and the add.

 

[Feanor]

This draft is terribly incomplete (and that's what I heard about it before, without being able to provide evidence LOL.). First of all, it doesn't contain any geographic description of the new border both parties were supposed to agree with.
You will notice that the word "the map" is marked as not agreed upon by Ukraine, indicating that they were no agreement yet on this subject.

That's very strange for a deal that was ready to be signed until Boris Johnson suddenly showed up to stop the hand holding the pen. Territorial negotiations can take months, and is the essential part of any peace agreement. Saying "to the 2022 borders" is only a speculation since their is no such mention in the draft and no such a thing as "2022 borders" as they always have been contested since 2014. It only mentions a "map" that is not joined with the document and which Ukraine didn't agree with at that time.

The draft only talk about Ukraine not being engaged in any military alliance with other countries. And Ukraine agreed about this principle.
Everybody thinks about NATO. In fact, the reason why Ukraine agreed with it is that it works both ways: Russia will also be forbidden to forge a military alliance with Ukraine, and more importantly, to station troops inside Ukraine. In other words, it prevents the type of alliance which exists between Russia and Belarus. Neutrality means also that they can't be allied with Russia. NATO is not mentioned in the draft.

The second thing that the draft talks about is the limitation of the Ukrainian military. Here again, the Ukrainians didn't agree with the numbers. My conclusion is that this draft was far from being ready to be signed as the rumours goes.

It was a deal on the table. Some sources, including at least one Ukrainian negotiator involved in the process, believe it was close to being worked out. The deal Ukraine has gotten in vague terms from Russia recently seems to be a variation on that deal but with the loss of a full 5 provinces. Presumably things can be negotiated down from there but this is not clear. Given that Ukraine continues to lose territory and considering that the volume of western support isn't what it used to be, it doesn't seem likely Ukraine is going to get a better deal.

It's like asking in 1942 if Poland will ever have good relations with Germany.
Today, they have good relations. So, everything is possible. In the modern world, good relations are always more profitable than bad relations.

You may want to consider what took place afterwards and how both countries came to be on good terms. Germany was occupied, dismembered into two states, losing some territory outright. Poland itself had their border redrawn and was part of the same Warsaw Pact as was the GDR. Societies in both countries were radically re-shaped, millions died, millions more were displaced. It's an open question whether these are still the same countries, though the nations are still generally the same.

 

[personaldesas]

You may want to consider what took place afterwards and how both countries came to be on good terms. Germany was occupied, dismembered into two states, losing some territory outright. Poland itself had their border redrawn and was part of the same Warsaw Pact as was the GDR. Societies in both countries were radically re-shaped, millions died, millions more were displaced.

Germany has seen a broad improvement in relationships across the board, as did most other Axis countries (everyone loves Italy). While I’m not suggesting this is a reproducible phenomenon that will always follow wars, I don’t think it can be explained solely by the specifics of any two countries if it was such a widespread occurrence.

It's an open question whether these are still the same countries, though the nations are still generally the same.

As much as any country is the same compared to a century ago.

 

[personaldesas]

Presumably things can be negotiated down from there but this is not clear. Given that Ukraine continues to lose territory and considering that the volume of western support isn't what it used to be, it doesn't seem likely Ukraine is going to get a better deal.

The lack of support is still really puzzling to me. It forces Ukraine into an unfavorable peace deal and sets yet another precedent that bullies can throw their weight around, start wars, shift borders, and get away with it, even when the victims are associates of the West, with obvious implications for countries like Taiwan.

I think when historians look back on this conflict, they’ll likely say that Russia won in large part due to its success and skill in the information space, gradually eroding public support within the countries supplying Ukraine.