Ukraine

[Elegua]

Ukr arty, with drones providing instantaneous target correction, has been pretty devastating for the Russian tanks. (idk how important the precision Excalibur shells have been in this, I believe they did not have them or many of them when they turned back the initial russian attacks). However, they also have been extremely poorly used - cannot do combined arms warfare (exposing the tanks to ambush by atgm's) and weak logistics (so they run out of fuel & parts & ammo).

I expect you are leading to the question: if the russia tanks have not been so valuable then why are is Ukr getting tanks so critical? Modern western MBT's can shoot while moving and move and shoot at night, and Ukr seems to have the ability to provide at least some combined arms cover for their tanks. Which makes them a bit less vulnerable to arty and ambush. But there is seemly a serious question of whether Ukr priority should be lighter vehicles (than MBT's) which would be more mobile and nimble. Both' is probably the Ukr answer, and both seem to be what they will get.

The tanks are a big deal but from what I understand the Swedish Archer 155mm artillery are a bigger deal than the tanks. Those guns are very powerful and highly mobile.

Still, it’s going to be a big help to Ukr to have a couple brigades of fully modern armor.

 

[Elegua]

Some interesting info.

The hard part will be finding export models that don’t have the classified depleted uranium armor.

 

[accnick]

The hard part will be finding export models that don’t have the classified depleted uranium armor.

Apparently, the depleted uranium armor is non-exportable technology, and will be removed and replaced with the armor used in the export models. I have no idea how complex this process is.

The tanks have to come from existing stock, as the sole builder has contractual obligations to Taiwan and Poland that use up the entire new tank production capacity (12 per month). This article is a really good summary of the situation:

U.S. to send Ukraine more advanced Abrams tanks — but no secret armor

The M1A2 version of the Abrams tank includes sophisticated optics and controls that help commanders rapidly track friendly vehicles, identify enemy positions and process artillery requests.

www.politico.com

 

[Bristol-Cruiser]

Interesting lack of millennials. OK, likely millions of economic migrants if UKR joined the EU and gained FoM. Tbh I don't see what Canada may be doing as very relevant. What's clear to anyone giving attention to attitudes in western Europe, UK included, is that a substantial demographic is increasingly hostile to immigrants. All immigrants, not only ones with a brown skin. Especially on the right, amongst boomers, amongst low to middling earners. To some extent the latter have a point; it is nice enough for people like me to have people from eastern Europe prepared to do the low-wage jobs in the service sector and elsewhere that make life comfortable but I'm not competing for those jobs, I'm trying to find a plumber. Couple that to the tendency of boomers to stop staring at their phone long enough to get off their arses and vote, this is an important segment of the electorate.

After countries such as Romania gained FoM, just shy of 450K Romanians out of a population of 20M moved to the UK. Government expectations had been a fraction of that. It was fine for me, I filled a job with a motivated skilled worker, for a job that nobody qualified in the UK wanted to do at the salary my employer chose to offer. But there's no doubt that such immigration, perceived as uncontrolled, generated widespread hostility.

So if millions of Ukrainians head west, not as pitiable refugees, mostly women and children but instead as mostly young men prepared to work for less than locals, I predict resentment and trouble.

Not denying there is resentment to immigration but that does not change the reality that countries with low fertility rates need to get and integrate immigrants to maintain a healthy economy. What Canada, Oz, and a number of other countries have done is to minimize, not climate, such resentment. Requires effective leadership which has been sorely lacking in the UK for a number of years.

 

[dogwatch]

I am not about to defend the dialogue in the UK but it is not limited to here. The far right is on the rise across Europe. You seem to be focussed on the Anglosphere. I'm afraid I don't agree with your assessment on AUS.

 

[Rennmaus]

I am not about to defend the dialogue in the UK but it is not limited to here. The far right is on the rise across Europe. You seem to be focussed on the Anglosphere. I'm afraid I don't agree with your assessment on AUS.

I agree 100%. While we have a severe lack of skilled workers and crafts(wo)men, just now, embarrassing demonstrations against a refugee shelter take place in Eastern Germany. Many visibly right-wingers attend, are probably the ringleaders.

 

[enigmatically2]

Russia showing their normal moderation in state TV

 

[Rennmaus]

The other day I asked what a "Shahed Hunter" might be. It's this:

 

[Mambo Kings]

The most urgent question may not be the money or resources we are spending to support, and eventually help rebuild Ukraine.

It is arguably what is our plan to rebuild Russia? Right now, we don’t have one: and that’s how this whole mess started. Before 1994.

This is one of the more astute questions on this thread.

There was a period in the history of the fall of the Soviet Union when Russia was open to integrating with Western economies. It was a window of opportunity that I fear has closed. Gorbachev opened the window with perestroika. Yeltsin passionately believed that Russia needed to embrace capitalism, trade and a rule of law that protected entrepreneurs. It was a golden opportunity to embrace Russia. Why did the West fail to embrace Russia and support an economic renaissance following the implosion of Russian communism?

I had a ringside seat when my erstwhile employer told me to hire the right people to build an East European financial business.

First, everyone underestimated the speed and ferocity of the rise of organized crime in Russia.

Second the dismantling and distribution of state owned assets on such a massive scale has never been attempted before. Russia neither had the political institutions nor the financial institutions to enact this process in a fair way. As a result it was like adding kerosene to the burning greed of organized crime. Criminal coalitions of genuine street thugs and sophisticated white collar criminals acquired unbelievable wealth.

In hindsight, Russia would have been better off leaving more assets in state ownership until the political, financial and legal institutions were stronger. The West made the mistake of supporting and encouraging privatization.....and hordes of western investors were scammed along the way.

At the same time as the economic assets were falling into the hands of a few very unsavory characters, the regional political structure was also in chaos. The communist party vetting of job candidates disappeared almost overnight. As a result crime and corruption immediately started to infiltrate all corners of local government. Russian communism was based on regionally centralized production committees who ordered everything from hospital supplies to tractors. On the one hand the means of production were being criminalized. On the other hand, the largest government customers were being criminalized. It was a perfect storm. European exporters into Russia would have to pay huge bribes to get goods licensed and distributed.

With wealth came political influence and then ultimately political power.

There was no Marshall Plan for Russia. To the average Russian , perestroika appeared to be a failure. There was a loss of pride and a decline in living standards.

A petty criminal who was hustling the streets of St Petersburg after getting laid off by the KGB, got into white collar crime when an opening on a regional trade committee was offered to him. From there to a mob boss in his own right and then to political power in Moscow.

At Moscow, Putin offered Russia the hard man they thought they needed to replace an inebriated, well-meaning alcoholic who had coincided with the decline in the Russian economy.

After their house had been burglarized, the Russians invited the burglars to stay and move into the master bedroom.

I dont know how you reverse this.

 

[Keith]

More Russian propaganda.

 

[Raz'r]

This war, after the even bigger COVID breakout's effects, is so f'cking depressing!

I wish 'they' (someone) would bomb and just obliterate the Kremlin. Let RU start all over on a better track....

Not sure that would change anything in Russia - We personalize this as a Putin problem, but it seems more a system problem - crony capitalism and authoritarian rule run amok. Putin dead doesn't change the system.

 

[Raz'r]

This is one of the more astute questions on this thread.

There was a period in the history of the fall of the Soviet Union when Russia was open to integrating with Western economies. It was a window of opportunity that I fear has closed. Gorbachev opened the window with perestroika. Yeltsin passionately believed that Russia needed to embrace capitalism, trade and a rule of law that protected entrepreneurs. It was a golden opportunity to embrace Russia. Why did the West fail to embrace Russia and support an economic renaissance following the implosion of Russian communism?

I had a ringside seat when my erstwhile employer told me to hire the right people to build an East European financial business.

First, everyone underestimated the speed and ferocity of the rise of organized crime in Russia.

Second the dismantling and distribution of state owned assets on such a massive scale has never been attempted before. Russia neither had the political institutions nor the financial institutions to enact this process in a fair way. As a result it was like adding kerosene to the burning greed of organized crime. Criminal coalitions of genuine street thugs and sophisticated white collar criminals acquired unbelievable wealth.

In hindsight, Russia would have been better off leaving more assets in state ownership until the political, financial and legal institutions were stronger. The West made the mistake of supporting and encouraging privatization.....and hordes of western investors were scammed along the way.

At the same time as the economic assets were falling into the hands of a few very unsavory characters, the regional political structure was also in chaos. The communist party vetting of job candidates disappeared almost overnight. As a result crime and corruption immediately started to infiltrate all corners of local government. Russian communism was based on regionally centralized production committees who ordered everything from hospital supplies to tractors. On the one hand the means of production were being criminalized. On the other hand, the largest government customers were being criminalized. It was a perfect storm. European exporters into Russia would have to pay huge bribes to get goods licensed and distributed.

With wealth came political influence and then ultimately political power.

There was no Marshall Plan for Russia. To the average Russian , perestroika appeared to be a failure. There was a loss of pride and a decline in living standards.

A petty criminal who was hustling the streets of St Petersburg after getting laid off by the KGB, got into white collar crime when an opening on a regional trade committee was offered to him. From there to a mob boss in his own right and then to political power in Moscow.

At Moscow, Putin offered Russia the hard man they thought they needed to replace an inebriated, well-meaning alcoholic who had coincided with the decline in the Russian economy.

After their house had been burglarized, the Russians invited the burglars to stay and move into the master bedroom.

I dont know how you reverse this.

exactly right.

 

[Stingray~]

Not sure that would change anything in Russia - We personalize this as a Putin problem, but it seems more a system problem - crony capitalism and authoritarian rule run amok. Putin dead doesn't change the system.

My 'obliterate the Kremlin' line was intended to be figurative. The thinking there needs to change, obviously.

Agreed, Mambo K posted a good one.

 

[Stingray~]

Ben Hodges speaks to how corruption has affected RU's military, briefly at this timestamp

 

[Mark_K]

This is one of the more astute questions on this thread.

There was a period in the history of the fall of the Soviet Union when Russia was open to integrating with Western economies. It was a window of opportunity that I fear has closed. Gorbachev opened the window with perestroika. Yeltsin passionately believed that Russia needed to embrace capitalism, trade and a rule of law that protected entrepreneurs. It was a golden opportunity to embrace Russia. Why did the West fail to embrace Russia and support an economic renaissance following the implosion of Russian communism?

I had a ringside seat when my erstwhile employer told me to hire the right people to build an East European financial business.

First, everyone underestimated the speed and ferocity of the rise of organized crime in Russia.

Second the dismantling and distribution of state owned assets on such a massive scale has never been attempted before. Russia neither had the political institutions nor the financial institutions to enact this process in a fair way. As a result it was like adding kerosene to the burning greed of organized crime. Criminal coalitions of genuine street thugs and sophisticated white collar criminals acquired unbelievable wealth.

In hindsight, Russia would have been better off leaving more assets in state ownership until the political, financial and legal institutions were stronger. The West made the mistake of supporting and encouraging privatization.....and hordes of western investors were scammed along the way.

At the same time as the economic assets were falling into the hands of a few very unsavory characters, the regional political structure was also in chaos. The communist party vetting of job candidates disappeared almost overnight. As a result crime and corruption immediately started to infiltrate all corners of local government. Russian communism was based on regionally centralized production committees who ordered everything from hospital supplies to tractors. On the one hand the means of production were being criminalized. On the other hand, the largest government customers were being criminalized. It was a perfect storm. European exporters into Russia would have to pay huge bribes to get goods licensed and distributed.

With wealth came political influence and then ultimately political power.

There was no Marshall Plan for Russia. To the average Russian , perestroika appeared to be a failure. There was a loss of pride and a decline in living standards.

A petty criminal who was hustling the streets of St Petersburg after getting laid off by the KGB, got into white collar crime when an opening on a regional trade committee was offered to him. From there to a mob boss in his own right and then to political power in Moscow.

At Moscow, Putin offered Russia the hard man they thought they needed to replace an inebriated, well-meaning alcoholic who had coincided with the decline in the Russian economy.

After their house had been burglarized, the Russians invited the burglars to stay and move into the master bedroom.

I dont know how you reverse this.

IMO a lot of people forgot or never knew how many decades it took for a firm rule-of-law and all the things that came with it to become established in Western democracies. Damn near 100 years in the US. We take all that utterly for granted these days but it was a long painful struggle with significant back-sliding along the way.

The Russians have a saying, "Chaos is the mother of order". The chaos of the 90s was so bad it demanded immediate order, and so they went authoritarian. However to say the window is closed is a pessimistic view. Central-state Marxism is not likely to come back to Russia, and the Russian people looked forward to the slow integration with the West which was well underway before this war.

An example of how Putin is not Stalin is in the use of the Wagners. Nowadays the only outfit where Soviet style discipline can be used on Russians. A lot has changed in Russia. It will probably continue to change.

 

[AnIdiot]

IMO a lot of people forgot or never knew how many decades it took for a firm rule-of-law and all the things that came with it to become established in Western democracies. Damn near 100 years in the US. We take all that utterly for granted these days but it was a long painful struggle with significant back-sliding along the way.

...

Only five have managed it so far.

Iceland
UK
Norway
New Zealand
Ireland

 

[phill_nz]

what you are using as facts to base those countries on


transparency international would have the following

finland, new zealand, denmark, sweden, norway, singapore

 

[AnIdiot]

It's a burgernomics style use of a single parameter, trading simplicity for accuracy.
Not to be taken too seriously but surprisingly useful.

(try and guess the parameter before you google it )

 

[Mambo Kings]

Not sure that would change anything in Russia - We personalize this as a Putin problem, but it seems more a system problem - crony capitalism and authoritarian rule run amok. Putin dead doesn't change the system.

Working out what would happen if Putin was killed is very complicated.
It is complicated enough trying to figure out what is going to happen as he gets older.

It creates 4 succession issues:

1. Who inherits the vast Personal Wealth and becomes head of the family?

• His ex-wife (married for 31 years) has been well taken care of for her loyalty, and caring for the kids. She has remarried and her personal foundation owns some landmark buildings in Moscow producing rent north of $5m per year and purportedly some property in Switzerland which would be frozen if we could find it. The new husband has been put in as foundation chair. They are all set.
• Putin has 2 daughters and three grandchildren from this marriage.
• The two daughters grew up as Putin grew from crime boss to political leader. They had to be sent abroad while Daddy was doing enforcement duties for the Tambov gang and things were getting hot in St Petersburg.
• The daughters did not grow up sweet and innocent. Both are "connected" . One married the younger son of Nikolai Shamalov. Shamalov is an absolute key person in understanding Putin's criminal network from St Petersburg until this day. He is the front man for real estate, banking and industrial assets owned by Putin and an accomplished extotionist, appearing in all sorts of discovery documents during the Siemens bribery investigation and the Panama Papers. Within days of the son marrying Putin's daughter he paid $100 for a 21% stake in Sibur (the former state owned petro-chemical assets of the soviet union), a relative bargain given that the company is valued at $10 bn. When he got divorced, half of all his assets went to Miss Putin. The other daughter is a sailor and endocrinologist but her ahem charity project cough Alfa-Endo is funded Mikhail Fridman. Mikhail was arrested in London last month for money laundering etc. . (Longer story about Mikhail but he is different from the other oligarchs)
• Not quite sure about the grandkids. The villa in Biaritz where they go on vacation was occupied by activists who wanted to use it as a home for Ukrainian refugees. Seemed like a good idea to me but the French police threw them out.
• Then , importantly, there is the amazing Alina Kabaeva, Putin's mistress and partner since at least 2008 and more likely 2005 and mother of two more of Putin's children.
• Since retiring as an athlete she served a while in the Russian parliament and then when the National Media Group were looking for an experienced media executive to chair the Russia's largest media and TV company they were advised to look no further than Kabieva. She is allegedly an intelligent, beautiful and ambitious Tatar from Uzbek (so possibly muslim). Her two kids were born in Switzerland.

The question is how will Putin's personal wealth be distributed and who will control it. It matters because it is a huge amount of assets in global terms bringing all sorts of influence.

2. Criminal Network Succession
Putin is head of by far the wealthiest organized crime network in the world. It is a parallel but distinct empire, separate from his responsibilities as political leader. This is a first generation organization so it does not have the succession mechanisms or the family values of the Mafia . We obviously have no idea what succession planning is in place. I doubt it will be a family member . It will likely either be planned because Putin has nominated his successor or chaos of a most violent nature.

3. Industrial, financial and natural resource companies' succession
The wealth may pass to family but it leaves the question of who will actually run and manage the companies. A number of the companies report to Shamalov. But Shamalov has always appeared to be the front man with Putin making the final decisions. Some of Putin's energy assets are fronted by a different front men, less connected to organized crime.

4. Political succession
In theory Russia has a constitution. The Presidential term is restricted to two terms. Putin is on his fourth term and looking forward to serving his fifth starting in 2024. His latest amendment to the constitution states that would be his last term finishing in 2030 when he is 78 years old. Maybe he will be ready to retire?
In the meantime, if Putin is killed, the prime minister, becomes acting President. The prime minister is Mikhail Mishustin. Mikhail is not related to any of Putin's criminal organizations and is quite the technocrat. If Mishustin became president, and survived as president, that would be very interesting. Mishustin has studiously avoided any comment on the war in Ukraine. It would appear that he was not involved in the planning or execution of the war.

 

[chesirecat]

Interesting talk from Fiona Hill on Putin and Ukraine.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_fourfm

She was a former official at the U.S. National Security Council, specializing in Russian and European affairs. She was a witness in the November 2019 House hearings regarding the impeachment inquiry during the first impeachment of Donald Trump