Ukraine War Watch Thread

[wjfox]

Sergei Lavrov: Russian foreign minister laughed at for Ukraine war claims

10 minutes ago

Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, was laughed at in Delhi after saying the Ukraine war was "launched against us".

Lavrov claimed Russia was trying to stop the Ukraine war, which began after its own full-scale invasion in February 2022.

He was speaking to a conference audience in Delhi on Friday, after a G20 foreign ministers' meeting.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-64848508

[caltrek]

One Year Later in Ukraine
by Ryan McMaken
March 4 , 2023

Introduction:

(The Mises Institute via Eurasia Review) It’s been a year since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In spite of claims from the regime and its media allies that Russia was the next Third Reich and would soon roll through half of Europe, it turns out that was never even remotely true.

In fact, things have unfolded more or less just like we predicted here at mises.org: the Russians aren’t even close to occupying any place in Europe beyond eastern Ukraine. It’s not Munich 1938. Economic sanctions have not crippled the Russian regime. Most of the world remains ambivalent on the conflict. The conflict will likely end with a negotiated settlement—contrary to what the Washington wants.

The fact is that in spite of the United States’ and North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) efforts to turn Ukraine into World War III, the war in Ukraine remains a regional conflict. It seems most of the world is uninterested in making sacrifices to carry out US policy in Ukraine and that many see the inherent hypocrisy behind US talk about respecting national sovereignty.

There’s also an important lesson here about listening to the war maximalists who incessantly promote full-scale war as the “solution” to every international crisis. The US clearly wants to fight the war to the last Ukrainian, in what the US is packaging as a global crusade in the style of World War II. But, it seems now that more pragmatic thinkers—i.e., the French and the Germans—recognize that negotiations are the more humane solution.

They Wanted a “Munich Moment”

Within days of the Russian invasion, the Western global hegemonists got to work claiming the invasion was essentially a war of global conquest. For instance, Matthew Kroenig in Foreign Policy stated that Vladimir Putin had shown a clear interest in “resurrecting the former Russian Empire, and other vulnerable Eastern European countries—Poland, Romania, or the Baltic states—might be next.” Kroenig immediately concluded that the US’s military budget should be doubled.

Read more here: https://www.eurasiareview.com/04032023 ... ng-oped/

caltrek’s comment: I think what should be kept in mind is the extent to which Russia has not moved beyond invading Ukraine is very much a result of the opposition that it faced in the Ukraine, as well as the membership so many other European countries have in NATO. So, an analogy to a “Munich Moment” may not entirely be inappropriate.

I do agree with calls for a negotiated settlement. Again such a settlement should recognize the legitimate security needs and concerns of both sides. Given a lack of behind the scenes knowledge, it is hard to determine if one side has sabotaged such a possible outcome more than the other. What is clear, despite some rather outlandish claims put forward by a certain Russian diplomat and what is reported to be an anonymous colonel, is that Russia engaged in an invasion of the Ukraine that went well beyond any actions that can be pointed to as constituting a provocation. Their reaction was far from proportional and did more to immiserate Russians living in the Ukraine than anything the Ukrainian government did in that regard.

The source of this article should also be noted: “The Mises Institute, founded in 1982, teaches the scholarship of Austrian economics, freedom, and peace. The liberal intellectual tradition of Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) and Murray N. Rothbard (1926-1995) guides us. Accordingly, the Mises Institute seeks a profound and radical shift in the intellectual climate: away from statism and toward a private property order. The Mises Institute encourages critical historical research, and stands against political correctness.”

So, apparently the institute is not concerned with being correct in its analysis.

[caltrek]

What Is the Russian Volunteer Corps?
by David Brennan
March 2, 2023

Introduction:

(Newsweek) The Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK)—a grouping of Russians fighting for Ukraine against Moscow's ongoing invasion of the country—on Thursday claimed to have undertaken a cross-border operation in which they attacked Russian military units.

Russian media claimed Thursday that a group of Ukrainian "saboteurs" had crossed the border into Bryansk Oblast, which borders Ukraine and Belarus, engaging in firefights, taking several people hostage, and inflicting civilian casualties.

Ukrainian officials quickly dismissed the reports as a Russian false flag. But the RDK then announced on its official Telegram channel that a group of its fighters had indeed crossed into Russia, though denied targeting any civilians or taking any hostages.

The Telegram post, which included a video of two armed men holding up an RDK flag in front of a Russian post box, declared that reports of hostage-taking or civilian casualties were "a lie of the Kremlin propagandists."

Further Extract:

Mark Voyger, a former special adviser for Russian and Eurasian affairs to then-commander of U.S. Army Europe, General Ben Hodges, told Newsweek he expected the Kremlin to leverage the situation to expand its war, regardless of whether the operation proved legitimate or a false flag.

Read more here: https://www.newsweek.com/what-russian- ... e-1785038

[caltrek]

Here is a Tass version of this story that reports on Putin's reaction:

Putin calls attack by Ukrainian militants in Bryansk Region 'act of terror'
March 2, 2023

Introduction:

MOSCOW, March 2. /TASS/. The attack by Ukrainian saboteurs in the Bryansk Region bordering Ukraine is a terrorist act, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with participants of the pilot educational program Mentor School.

Soldiers and officers of the Russian Armed Forces are now courageously carrying out their duty, protecting Russia, Putin stressed. "Protecting against neo-Nazis and against terrorists such as those who were torturing and killing people in Donbass for eight years, such as those who murdered Darya Dugina in Moscow, such as those who today carried out another act of terror, committed another crime, infiltrated the border area and opened fire on civilians," the president stressed.

The saboteurs were well aware that they were attacking a civilian car. "They saw it was a civilian car, saw that civilians and children were inside, that it was just a Niva car, but no, they opened fire on them," Putin said.

It is people like this who "set out to deprive the Russian people of their historical memory, deprive us of our history, our traditions, and language," President Putin stressed.

"This is violence, real crime, committed exactly by the neo-Nazis I’ve just mentioned, and by their masters. I'm sure that these very masters won’t remember today's crime. No one will even pay heed to it," Putin went on to say. "They won't succeed, we will put the squeeze on them," he vowed.

Read more here: https://tass.com/defense/1584115?utm_s ... ial_share

[wjfox]

[ibm9000]

Old news...

To begin with, nobody on the Russian side made reference to tactical nuclear weapons; the entire concept is a western interpolation. Using low yield nuclear weapons would be more than just counterproductive, it would completely smash important elements of Putin’s overarching political framework for the war. Russia aims to retain the support of key Eurasian powers like China and India, keep the United States and NATO from becoming directly involved in the Ukraine War, and maintain the attritive tempo of the war by preventing the transfer of weapons like ATACMs to Ukraine. Deploying a tactical nuclear weapon would shatter all these objectives. It also strains credulity to presume that Russia, which began the war with a very light hand, sparing critical infrastructure at the onset and generally handling the Ukrainians gently, would skip multiple escalation rungs and resort directly to a very blunt instrument.
That the destruction of the Nordstream Pipeline was simply tolerated is strong evidence of a mutual commitment to avoid escalation. Compare this to the terrorist/special operation attack on the Kerch Bridge, which prompted a ferocious punitive barrage by Russia and intensified strikes on Ukraine’s energy grid.
Russian Defense Minister Shoygu had a phone conversation with his American counterpart Lloyd Austin, after which the US government stated that it has seen no evidence that Russia intends to use nuclear weaponry. Putin followed up on this with his own statement that Russia has no plans to use nuclear weapons and that it would make neither military nor political sense to do so.

...with perspective.

[erowind]

caltrek’s comment: I think what should be kept in mind is the extent to which Russia has not moved beyond invading Ukraine is very much a result of the opposition that it faced in the Ukraine, as well as the membership so many other European countries have in NATO. So, an analogy to a “Munich Moment” may not entirely be inappropriate.

I do agree with calls for a negotiated settlement. Again such a settlement should recognize the legitimate security needs and concerns of both sides. Given a lack of behind the scenes knowledge, it is hard to determine if one side has sabotaged such a possible outcome more than the other. What is clear, despite some rather outlandish claims put forward by a certain Russian diplomat and what is reported to be an anonymous colonel, is that Russia engaged in an invasion of the Ukraine that went well beyond any actions that can be pointed to as constituting a provocation. Their reaction was far from proportional and did more to immiserate Russians living in the Ukraine than anything the Ukrainian government did in that regard.

The entire situation could be resolved if both NATO and Russia pulled out of Ukraine, and NATO pulled out of every former Soviet country for that matter as was promised during various negotiations in the 1990s. Likewise Russia should withdraw all military forces from Belarus and Pridnestrovia too. Military withdrawals and disarmament of nuclear arsenals and a drawdown in all military spending in the region is the most sane humane outcome. Ample transparent observers from either side could verify the process. This simply won't happen because stupid nationalists on both sides in all the countries involved want to suicidally drive us all towards greater war. I think it comes from collective and individual trauma honestly.

People keep poking at Russia over this war with the various propaganda justifications that Russia has given and spouting speculation after speculation. The reality is that the Cuban missile crises is comparable to NATO expansion today and anyone who's studied it knows that the world was genuinely on the edge of WWIII at the time. If it weren't for Krushchev and Kennedy consciously and deliberately deescalating the conflict WWIII would have happened. The US was mere days, perhaps, even hours away from firing on Soviet forces which would have quickly lead to invading Cuba directly. Cooler heads are not prevailing this time, I think because both powers involved are capitalist imperialists and capitalist empires tend to fight each other throughout history. Ironically the Soviets and 20th century America were more reasonable countries diplomatically in regards to direct conflict as hard as that is to believe. There's never been a major proxy war this close to the border of either Russia or America before.

[ibm9000]

The failure to end the war reflects not only the undoubtedly great strength of the forces sustaining it, but reflects, as well, the limits and defects of the best current understanding of those forces and of the overall system in which they operate: an inadequate grasp of all the motives and institutions that matter, and of their vulnerabilities to change. That is not so necessarily; but I believe that it is the case. As the war goes on, the meaning of its nature and of its continuance becomes more and more challenging.
In my opinion this war, even at this late stage, needs not only to be resisted; it remains to be understood.
I am speaking of the limitations not only of public awareness but of the best analyses by "experts" —former officials, radical critics, journalists, or academic specialists. No one known to me —and that includes myself— seems to possess as yet an adequate comprehension of the forces, institutions, motives, beliefs, and decisions that have led us as a nation to do what we (they) have done to the people of Indochina (Ukraine) as long as we (and they) have (and are).

D. Ellsberg.

[wjfox]

[ibm9000]

Just like Hiroshima.