The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

I'll try for another update this weekend, meanwhile nothing particularly dramatic has happened. Russia continues to inch forward east of the Oskol near Kupyansk, towards the canal east of Slavyansk, deeper into Konstantinovka, north-west of Pokrovsk, and west-ward in eastern Zaporozhye. Ukraine is counter-attacking with some success around Krasniy Liman, in the border area north of Kupyansk, and with considerable success around Stepnogorsk. Russian net gains continue but still at a substantially slower pace than '25 or even the second half of '24. It remains to be seen if these battles lead to any Ukrainian collapses, that would give Russia territorial gains that could off-set current slower pace advances, or if Russia's net annual gains will slow down for the first time since '23.

In general territory remains a secondary factor, with this being a war of attrition,and changes in the nature of the fighting can change territorial patterns without a direct connection to the attrition rate. Unfortunately this doesn't help us see which way things are going. Again I think the macro trends haven't fundamentally shifted, so in principle we're still headed in the same direction. Though on the diplomacy front things have changed. It appears previous efforts at diplomacy, pushing off from the meeting in Anchorage, are effectively done. Russia is openly stating they intend to reconsider the terms they intend to offer Ukraine, likely hardening them. Ukraine meanwhile has openly rejected giving up any territory as part of a peace settlement.

This may be a war of attrition but it feels like territory losses are the main pressure mechanism on Ukraine's government to accept bad terms to end the war. A secondary type of pressure is energy infrastructure destruction, especially during the winter. These seem to be the two types of heavy pressure that may get Ukraine to submit diplomatically.

As long as the front is relatively stable the longterm plan to wait out the russsians seems achievable. I mean, weathering the russian campaign until the russian economy collapses or a coup happens or Putin dies or he becomes politically very weak and unpopular and needs to end the war without achieving all the objectives.

This is just my opinion after all these years of war, happy to hear counterpoints.

Deus Ex Machina said:

This may be a war of attrition but it feels like territory losses are the main pressure mechanism on Ukraine's government to accept bad terms to end the war. A secondary type of pressure is energy infrastructure destruction, especially during the winter. These seem to be the two types of heavy pressure that may get Ukraine to submit diplomatically.

Click to expand...

Agreed. And I think the pressure is political. I.e. they're using the pressure to get the political concessions they want.

As long as the front is relatively stable the longterm plan to wait out the russsians seems achievable. I mean, weathering the russian campaign until the russian economy collapses or a coup happens or Putin dies or he becomes politically very weak and unpopular and needs to end the war without achieving all the objectives.

This is just my opinion after all these years of war, happy to hear counterpoints.

Click to expand...

I think it's a very risky proposition. Either side can collapse, either side can experience a coup. I think on a long enough timeline Ukraine is likelier to collapse than Russia. It's important to note that Russia effectively failed, twice, in their strategic goals of '22, both the initial invasion and the second phase where they attempted to defeat the Ukrainian military in the field. But this didn't lead to Russia retreating or giving up. They switched to a strategic defense posture for ~1 year, built up resources, conducted some local offensive action (most notably Artemovsk/Bakhmut) and weathered Ukraine's offensive efforts in '23 quite well. And then they resumed advances. I think if Russia really does experience resource issues or start to run down, they will once again switch to a defensive posture. I don't think Ukraine can count on an end to the war where Russia actually returns all the territory they've taken. Which raises the question, wouldn't it make more sense to just strike a deal now?

And meanwhile the damage to Ukraine as a country is accumulating. The population keeps leaving, things keep getting destroyed, and territory is still being lost, just slowly. The front has been relatively stable for the past 3.5 years, but in that time Ukraine lost millions in population, hundreds of billions USD worth of infrastructure, and the end is nowhere in sight. At some point the balance sheet has to be that it's more worth it to give Russia the territory they want then to keep paying this kind of cost. That's assuming the calculus is about what's best for Ukraine.

Feanor said:

, wouldn't it make more sense to just strike a deal now?

Click to expand...

How can any ukrainian leader agree to those extreme russian demands? I wouldn't. It seems Russia doesn't really want to end the war. I believe russian leadership has calculated that Ukraine will become a permanent western satellite state with billions pouring in for reconstruction and army rebuilding, making a future war a hard proposition.

And of course you can expect the ukrainians to trample all over the agreements they will have signed about no foreign troops and military alliances. Just like they didn't honor the previous agreements after the Donbass war. And the US+EU will support them because the agreements were unfair and made under duress (sounds stupid to people that follow history and geopolitics but the public opinion will support this)

If I were Putin I would keep the war going until Ukraine has no chance to recover and all those millions of ukrainians never come back. They want to make it a permanent failed state circling the drain that's not worth investing billions into. That's why I believe Russia doesn't *really* want to end the war yet and they make unreasonable demands, like for example a lot of territory with cities in it. Who would accept that? Who COULD accept that at this point?

A negotiation where no one will get everything they want. The question is what does that look like.

The Europeans will said Putin can't be trusted and victory is round the corner while the Russians will argue NATO can't be trusted and they can still be successful. But looking at the way it is going, neither side will get to where they want on the battlefield. Sure both sides can try and wait it out on claims that they other side is about to collapse. But there is just more social and economic damages on both sides.

There's a lot of sunken cost fallacy to overcome on both sides.

Deus Ex Machina said:

How can any ukrainian leader agree to those extreme russian demands? I wouldn't. It seems Russia doesn't really want to end the war. I believe russian leadership has calculated that Ukraine will become a permanent western satellite state with billions pouring in for reconstruction and army rebuilding, making a future war a hard proposition.

Click to expand...

Its why they want a demilitarized Ukraine. It's not so much about invading again as it is about making sure that Ukraine cant be turned into a militarized EU/NATO outpost.

And of course you can expect the ukrainians to trample all over the agreements they will have signed about no foreign troops and military alliances. Just like they didn't honor the previous agreements after the Donbass war. And the US+EU will support them because the agreements were unfair and made under duress (sounds stupid to people that follow history and geopolitics but the public opinion will support this)

Click to expand...

I think this is why Russia has demanded the handover of the rest of Donetsk region as part of the ceasefire. That way if Ukraine tramples on the agreement and fighting resumes, Ukraine will have given you territory for nothing. It's part of what makes me think Russia is really looking to end the war rather than just pause it for a while.

If I were Putin I would keep the war going until Ukraine has no chance to recover and all those millions of ukrainians never come back. They want to make it a permanent failed state circling the drain that's not worth investing billions into. That's why I believe Russia doesn't *really* want to end the war yet and they make unreasonable demands, like for example a lot of territory with cities in it. Who would accept that? Who COULD accept that at this point?

Click to expand...

Maybe. I wouldnt be surprised if thats an option thats on the table. But i suspect Russia would accept a peace where their current terms are met. In fact there's a chance Ukraine is already past that point.