Russia and the West

seaspear

Active Member
I am not sure that Ukraine has been so consistent in an application for membership of N.a.t.o
Ukraine to apply for EU membership in 2024, says president certainly this article suggests it was many years off
This article suggests that Biden IN 2014 told Ukrainian officials of concerns of Ukraine in fighting corruption criteria of joining both N.A.T.O and the E.U
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Ted Cruz a US sanator opposes suggestions by Biden granting autonomy to the donbass region.
Biden administration officials said the US would press Ukraine to cede autonomy to regions of eastern Ukraine controlled since 2014 by pro-Russia separatists. A vague “special status” for those areas was laid out in a European-brokered peace plan in 2015.

Republicans condemned reports of the move by the White House, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) accusing the administration of “appeasement” of Russia.

“Joe Biden and Biden-Harris officials are pushing Ukraine to give up territory to Putin in exchange for promises that he won’t invade even further, for now,” Cruz tweeted. “It’s the literal definition of appeasement. Utterly disgraceful.”
We have a rule against politics here, except when it's DIRECTLY RELATED to defence acquisitions and policy. We especially stay well clear of US domestic politics. Discussion of such is forbidden.
 

Defcon Drum

New Member
My first post on this forum guys so please bare with me! Reading all the above makes sense and that is how I've perceived a lot of the cause of this brewing tension. Until recently I did not favour VP much and thought he was just another tyrant. However looking at the developments and in a very subtle provocative action, all of what the US/ NATO pact are doing is making the situation worse. I have watched many Youtube clips of VP talking at summits (of which one the whole Intnl Media was in attendance) and I'd say that my viewpoint of him changed significantly. A lot of what he said made sense too and he was very calm and collected,but hugely passionate about the points he put across. Much of which have been stated above by Feanor! Sometimes we have to look at the other side's viewpoint/argument!
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #224
It looks like the Russo-Belarussian United Resolve 2022 exercises are responsible for a nearly unprecedented level of troop movements. The total numbers involved are 60-80 thousand (estimate) but Russia moved large numbers of troops all the way across the country, from East MD. Apparently over 200 total trains. For comparison West-2021 involved 29 trains.

Troops are coming from a tank bde, 4 motor-rifle bdes, a motor-rifle regiment, a marine bde, two para-assault bdes, one SpN bde, two artillery bdes, one missile bde, and elements of engineers, CBRN, air defense, etc. Note not the entire units are moving. Likely 1-2 btlns per unit are involved.

 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

Russia already replace Ukrainian Naval engine with their own. With Ukrainian stagnate tech development, I do think the Russian replacement potential have an edge over Ukrainian model.

However the Ukrainian Industrial military complex are in the East. In the area that mostly voted for Pro Russian President, and where large ethnic Russian reside. If Pro Western Ukraine in west need to be taken out from getting problematic in future for Russia, taking out Ukraine Industrial Milirary complex, from the hand of Western Ukrainian is more likely be the motive.

Ukrainian also taking some Russian military export market. By taking out East Ukraine (probably by creating seperate nation entity from the West Ukraine) is probably more beneficial for Russia, then engaging a war in the Western part with more 'hostile' population toward Russia than those in the Eastern part.

Potential Eastern Ukraine become seperate Nation from Western Ukraine also probable on economics stand point. Asside military industrial complex, it's also hold most heavy industry, shipyards and coastal area. If that happen, West Ukraine will left mostly as agricultural nation that cease to become potential defense threat to Russia.
 
Last edited:

Redrighthand

New Member
.. As a member of a middle class in a reasonably prosperous country, an independent judiciary is your only guarantee that you'll be protected from the wealthier and more powerful then yourself (and it's always been part ideal, part reality). I agree that those things are necessary for democracy, but I also think democracy is necessary for those things. It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation, and in most places the evolution of democratic institutions seems to hand in had with a robust free press, and a relatively independent judiciary (which raises all kinds of interesting questions about what happens when you see opposite trends ocurring, like a curtailement of judicial independence).
Years ago I heard a really good interview with an Australian ADF officer who was a legal expert and had been involved in INTERFET (in East Timor). Obviously this is regarding building a new state, so is only partly relevant. However, what I found interesting was his view that elections were all well and good, but first you had to establish the rule of law. In this way, people who had been victims of corruption or extortion or other crimes by violent groups - state backed militia, gangs, etc. - could re-establish themselves with the backing of a police force & judicial system. Then there's an understanding that there WOULD be repercussions for people using standover tactics. Without that, you can't have a democracy, because if a thug is standing next to the polling station telling you not to vote a particular way, there's no real democracy to be had. I think this is a key step that some countries have forgotten when trying to rebuild failed states... I think what I'm saying is the chicken is democracy, the egg is rule of law that applies to everyone.

It holds relevance for existing states that have no independent judiciary to speak of, for much the same reasons. If you can't hold officials accountable, then you can't have a democracy. But when corruption is inherent in a system, how do you get the ball rolling in the right direction?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Interesting article, I didn't know about the naval engine angle. Additional reasons for Vlad or maybe the real reason.?
Russia already has its own indigenous gas turbine engine manufacturers located within the traditional Russian borders and have had long before the split up of the USSR. To modify a gas turbine to operate as a marine powerplant is an engineering procedure that is very well known and understood.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #229
Interesting article, I didn't know about the naval engine angle. Additional reasons for Vlad or maybe the real reason.?
This is dead wrong. Not only is he not the father of the navy in any tangible way, but also the situation is the opposite. Pre-2014 Russia had all the Ukrainian engines they could pay for. They also had German engines coming in. After the war started Russia lost access to both sources. Recovering that access would have been important around 2015-2018 timeframe, but at this point huge resources have been invested in producing domestic alternatives, successfully (at least from the looks of it). To top it off the factory is in Nikolaev. Invading that far would involve not only advancing in the south all the way to the Crimean peninsula, but even past that point. The costs of that kind of invasion and occupation far outweigh the limited benefits of acquiring the engine manufacturer.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
I have no idea if the Russians indeed have ''succeeded in sowing panic'' but to me they certainly hold the initiative and are keenly aware that within NATO there may be differences of opinion as to how to deal with the issue. A major advantage the Russians have is the knowledge that NATO does not have the political intent to be actively involved in a conflict.
Putin is probably in his office having a good chuckle at how certain countries are reacting to all this palaver. The people I think are sowing three seeds of panic are mainly the US & UK talking heads, Jens Stoltenberg (Nato Sec Gen) and the Baltic States. These are the people I see in a state of panic on the news.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Russia already has its own indigenous gas turbine engine manufacturers located within the traditional Russian borders and have had long before the split up of the USSR. To modify a gas turbine to operate as a marine powerplant is an engineering procedure that is very well known and understood.
Not all the projects used gas turbines, the Project 20385 Corvettes used high speed marine diesels which weren't made domestically. The Project 22350 used a gas turbine and two diesels, again note made domestically. NPO Saturn builds gas turbines but they didn't build marine gas turbines, they do now. What a lot of the sanctions have done is make Russia less dependent on imported technology.
 

ddxx

Active Member
I'm also not interested in emphasising things over and over again. I will say however that there are 2 two sides to every narrative; that adopting the position that one side is solely or largely to blame and viewing things mainly from the narrow lens of one particular side provides a very convenient and appealing narrative but one which is distorted, inaccurate and simplistic.

You want to talk about policy; NATO's policy of slowly expanding closer and closer to Russia's border's and sphere of interests have not worked. It has not created a more stable Europe and has not deterred Russia - it has had the opposite effect. It has created a very annoyed and insecure Russia and that has consequences as Russia is reacting the way it knows how; in a way which it feels works for it.; in ways which I suspect NATO/the West are not really sure how to respond to apart from doing what they've long been doing.

What is NATOs/the West's ultimate solution to this problem? More rhetoric about how Russia is a ''threat''; is ''expansionist'' and ''destabilising''; followed by more sanctions and exercises to ''show resolve in the face of aggression''? If that does not work what next? Enlarge NATO even further? If Russia still misbehaves what next; any answers? Either NATO/the West maintains the present course or it genuinely makes an attempt to reach some level of common ground with the Russians. Then again some adopt the position that this is impossible because Russia is not willing to budge at all and that it wants the talks to fail in order to be able to justify a later invasion of the Ukraine.
Whilst I’d agree that you’re correct in the sense that no side is fully pure, calling Russia’s stance as no more than ‘western’ rhetoric is being wilfully blind to very recent history.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

This UK allegations even being doubted by some sections of Ukraine society. On other forums I also saw Ukraine own online media that talk this UK accusation being used by Pro Western factions for pushing toward Pro Russian factions. If this true, this's only further benefit Russia on getting more schism in internal Ukraine especialy in the East.

West must calm themselves and thinking where their overall strategy so far benefiting for. I do see as outsiders, this is only giving more score to Putin instead.
 

denix56

Active Member

This UK allegations even being doubted by some sections of Ukraine society. On other forums I also saw Ukraine own online media that talk this UK accusation being used by Pro Western factions for pushing toward Pro Russian factions. If this true, this's only further benefit Russia on getting more schism in internal Ukraine especialy in the East.

West must calm themselves and thinking where their overall strategy so far benefiting for. I do see as outsiders, this is only giving more score to Putin instead.
I can see the plot scenario work only if there will be Russian forces in Kyiv. Forcing Ukraine to implement Minsk agreements might cause the new wave of protests that will be an excuse for intervention.
As the Ukrainian myself, I can say that the pro-Russian supporters living in Ukraine-controlled territory are relatively small in numbers (not only in the western parts, but in the central ones too), and a lot of these people are > 65 years old, making it unlikely for them to overthrow the goverment without some muscles.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #236
This is a bit confusing for me are they based there all the time ? But it does read like they were armed training flights.
It's another piece of non-news. Tu-95s are based out of Engels and conduct flights and combat training on a regular basis. It would normally be expected that some bomber component participates in something like the United Resolve 2022 exercises.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
This is a bit confusing for me are they based there all the time ? But it does read like they were armed training flights.
It's another piece of non-news. Tu-95s are based out of Engels and conduct flights and combat training on a regular basis. It would normally be expected that some bomber component participates in something like the United Resolve 2022 exercises.
What would be highly suspicious is if Engels went quiet for a week or so. You know the routine flying operations just shut right down. Unless there has been a major crash and aircraft are grounded due to either an unknown cause or a very serious fleet wide component failure there would be only one other reason why the Engels bomber fleet would be suddenly grounded and / or on very reduced flying hours. That is an intensive maintenance period to ensure that all the aircraft are fully operational and serviced for an upcoming operation of national strategic importance.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #238
What would be highly suspicious is if Engels went quiet for a week or so. You know the routine flying operations just shut right down. Unless there has been a major crash and aircraft are grounded due to either an unknown cause or a very serious fleet wide component failure there would be only one other reason why the Engels bomber fleet would be suddenly grounded and / or on very reduced flying hours. That is an intensive maintenance period to ensure that all the aircraft are fully operational and serviced for an upcoming operation of national strategic importance.
I mean... that kind of analysis requires a baseline. So you need to have a good chart of activity for say, the past 3-5 years (more would be better). And then see if the current activity represents an outlier. The article is very short, very vague, and just talks about a pair of Tu-95s. There's so little info that even if you had the baseline, you wouldn't be able to reliably get much off of just this article for the current situation. Articles like these make me distrust the narrative that they are supporting. I could take any point in the last 7 years and come up with a set of strictly speaking true articles, and a bit of spin, and portray Russia as preparing for an invasion of Ukraine. Now just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. But paranoia is not a good basis for analysis or predictions.

And while we're at it, I've got an odd guess of my own. Russia's Duma is currently discussing a proposed diplomatic recognition of the LDNR. Maybe the plan is, if negotiations with the US go well, this all winds down to nothing. And doing well doesn't require the US acceding to all demands. It's highly likely that there are key ones and secondary ones, meant to be chipped away. It's even possible that there are multiple possible non-overlapping combinations that Russia would be happy with. But if the negotiations don't go well, Russia recognizes the LDNR, and at the slightest provocation (or without any at all, not that provocations are hard to come by) proceeds to launch a limited scope operation to push Ukraine to the administrative boundries of Lugansk and Donetsk regions. It would neatly sidestep the issue of potentially unfriendly locals, it's even possible that Russia has already hinted at this to the US (remember Biden differentiating between smaller Russian incursions and full on invasions?) and it might be the type of operation that can be hindered with sufficient modern anti-armor weapon (assuming they're going to push through the existing front line and not just go around from Russian territory). Please take this with a table-spoon of salt, as this is just an educated guess on my part. But it seems awfully believable to me, and would let Russia say that they "didn't invade Ukraine", since they're supporting recognized (by them and only them) independent states. It would make US claims of Russian invasion preparations true, just not in the way that anyone in the media is speculating. It would even make some local sense, as it would push the front line far from the major urban areas and thus make them safe from continued Ukrainian shelling.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
@Feanor That sounds about right. IIRC there is another enclave of separatists on the Ukrainian side of the Russian / Ukrainian border and there is your second Russian jumping off point. Actually it would be the third because they could jump off from the Crimea as well. I use the term jumping off points because then they are inside Ukrainian territory and can advance deeper into the Ukraine on one of many pretexts if Putin so desires.

WRT Engels, the Americans would have a pretty good baseline of flight operations from there through national technical means. That's one place that they will have been monitoring or decades, just like the Russians have done and will be doing with the B-1B, B-2 & B-52 bases. Those are capabilities of your opponent that you want to watch like a hawk.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #240
@Feanor That sounds about right. IIRC there is another enclave of separatists on the Ukrainian side of the Russian / Ukrainian border and there is your second Russian jumping off point. Actually it would be the third because they could jump off from the Crimea as well. I use the term jumping off points because then they are inside Ukrainian territory and can advance deeper into the Ukraine on one of many pretexts if Putin so desires.
Advancing out of Crimea might be hard, it's a very narrow area, and you would immediately end up deep in enemy territory. There's also nothing immediately significant in Kherson. They could, theoretically, move towards Nikolaev and Odessa, but that would leave them with an unprotected northern flank, which means either sacrificing a lot of troops to cover it, or risking a counter-attack that cuts them off from Crimea. I suspect any attack out of Crimea would be a diversion without bigger goals.

WRT Engels, the Americans would have a pretty good baseline of flight operations from there through national technical means. That's one place that they will have been monitoring or decades, just like the Russians have done and will be doing with the B-1B, B-2 & B-52 bases. Those are capabilities of your opponent that you want to watch like a hawk.
Of course, the US does. But we don't, and I suspect neither does whoever wrote that article.
 
Top