Navigating the Tensions in Ukraine: A Scientific Perspective

[DennisN]

Putin Assails Russians Who Back the West, Signaling More Repression (NYT, 16 March 2022)
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/world/europe/putin-russia-ukraine-protests.html

President Vladimir V. Putin on Wednesday referred to pro-Western Russians as “scum and traitors” who needed to be removed from society, describing the war in Ukraine as part of an existential clash with the United States and setting the stage for an ever fiercer crackdown at home and even more aggression abroad.

...

“The Russian people will always be able to distinguish true patriots from scum and traitors and simply spit them out like a fly that accidentally flew into their mouths,” Mr. Putin said. “I am convinced that such a natural and necessary self-purification of society will only strengthen our country, our solidarity, cohesion and readiness to respond to any challenges.”

...

“This speech was, in part, an informal and indirect sanctioning of mass repression,” Ms. Stanovaya said. “His speech was scary — very scary.”

I've seen the recent Putin speech the article is referring to, and it is truly astounding.
It is on youtube (with age restriction).

I hate to say it, but the Putin policy is starting to sound and smell quite like fascism.

(I'm shaking my head in disbelief)

 

[PeroK]

I think The President of the United States is doing an excellent job in a very very very difficult situation. Sorrow may be our constant companion but Anger dare not be our guide. Emotion cannot be our calculus. Moral disgust is appropriate but not a solution.
Thermonuclear Weapons, even launched with righteous indignation, are far less moral than many small bodies bombed onto the street by a lunatic. There is no ambiguity here

The other side of the coin is how we live with ourselves if we let Ukraine fall and see its people brutalized beyond imagination. Not anger, and not emotion, but perhaps a sense of morality?

There are no easy answers, of course, but what the Russians might do to Ukraine is too terrible to think about. And, what Putin might do to any Russians at home who cross him.

 

[artis]

I think a very decent video of the current situation

 

[artis]

Not sure who made this or whether it is real (seems to be) but impressive.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't understand this:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/16/investing/russian-debt-payments/index.html

So apparently Russia made the debt payment that was due yesterday except that they didn't yet because the money is frozen in a foreign account except that the US says they are going to let the payment go through? So is the money frozen or not? Has the payment gone through or not? What does it mean to be "frozen" if they can still access and use the money? I feel like this article glossed over the actual story.

 

[neilparker62]

I think a very decent video of the current situation

does not impress. "Fog of War" revels in telling us how wrong we all are. But nothing about cynical attacks on civilian targets, maternity hospitals etc by Mr Putin's heroic forces. Even strategically speaking the supposed 'blitzkrieg' failed dismally and now they're just throwing toys indiscriminately. Whilst at home there are increasingly hysterical outbursts.

 

[artis]

does not impress. "Fog of War" revels in telling us how wrong we all are. But nothing about cynical attacks on civilian targets, maternity hospitals etc by Mr Putin's heroic forces. Even strategically speaking the supposed 'blitzkrieg' failed dismally and now they're just throwing toys indiscriminately. Whilst at home there are increasingly hysterical outbursts.

Well you are correct about the thing he left out, but then again the guy just tries to assess the situation from a military standpoint. I don't think there is one source out there that has managed to give the full honest and all encompassing picture of this war in a single video yet, the conflict is too large to be examined from all sides and the information is too distorted to have very specific assessments.
The fact that we know Russia is committing war crimes against civilians is simply because it is done on a scale so large that it is impossible to deny by either side.

 

[Astronuc]

Putin policy is starting to sound and smell quite like fascism.

Starting? Putin's policy is facism and has been for some time. He gets what he wants by intimidation/coercion and violence to mass homicide. Before the current invasion of Ukraine, was the seizure of parts of Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk, since 6 April 2014), before that the seizure of Crimea (February and March 2014, and annexation on 18 March 2014), before that the invasion of Georgia (1–12 August 2008) and the slaughter in Chechnya (26 August 1999 – 31 May 2000, 1 June 2000 – 16 April 2009).

Domestically, Putin has his opponents assassinated or imprisoned. He has rigged elections and his enablers in the State Duma and Federation Council have amended the Russian Constitution to accommodate Putin.

I heard a translation of some of the text of Putin's speech from yesterday, in which he denounced traitors, i.e., those who lean to the west and away from Putin. Those opposed to Putin's policies will be purged.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2022-03-16/putin-says-he-ll-get-rid-of-scum-and-traitors-video

"In the foreseeable future, it was possible that the pro-Nazi regime in Kyiv could have got its hands on weapons of mass destruction, and its target, of course, would have been Russia," Putin said.

Putin has consistently described the democratically elected leaders of Ukraine as neo-Nazis bent on committing genocide against Russian-speakers in the east of the country - a line that the West denounces as baseless war propaganda.

He said Western countries wanted to turn Russia into a "weak dependent country; violate its territorial integrity; to dismember Russia in a way that suits them".

If the West thought that Russia would break down or back down, "they don't know our history or our people", Putin said on the 21st day of the war.

https://www.reuters.com/world/putin-says-western-attempt-global-dominance-will-fail-2022-03-16/

Of course, many in the west know Russian history. And certainly Russia could be a economically strong and productive member of the global community, except for Putin and the other criminals running the country and oppressing the Russian people. Russia is a military-police state, and it will only get worse under Putin. Putin is not Russia, although he seems to believe that.

And finally, Biden has come out and labeled Putin a war criminal.

 

[fresh_42]

He said Western countries wanted to turn Russia into a "weak dependent country; violate its territorial integrity; to dismember Russia in a way that suits them".

This is a symptom of dementia and F60.0. Those people lose more and more of their realism and are building their own mental world. No big deal, as long as they don't have nuclear bombs.

 

[Astronuc]

This is a symptom of dementia and F60.0.

and apparently in Putin's case, steroid abuse. However, Putin has always had certain psychopathy. I would add F60.3, F60.4, F60.7, and F60.8 (.81) to his personality profile.

 

[hutchphd]

I would like to submit a modest proposal for evaluation on the merits by this august multitude:.

What if the bordering states (Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Finland and the Baltics) could be declared militarily unaligned? In my mind this would mean extremely limited numbers of foreign troops allowed and no nukes or other proxy weapons. They would otherwise be free to raise a local national army however they desire. Any attempts to circumvent this would cause immediate response from the offended side (NATO or Russian)

I am under no illusion that this would be simple. But is it a useful idea? Could it be made to work ?

/

 

[Astronuc]

Reuters - Russia warns United States: we have the might to put you in your place
https://news.yahoo.com/russia-put-enemies-united-states-074753510.html

LONDON (Reuters) -Russia warned the United States on Thursday that Moscow had the might to put the world's pre-eminent superpower in its place and accused the West of stoking a wild Russophobic plot to tear Russia apart.

Dmitry Medvedev, who served as president from 2008 to 2012 and is now deputy secretary of Russia's Security Council, said the United States had stoked "disgusting" Russophobia in an attempt to force Russia to its knees.

Nonsense

Since Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, the United States and its European and Asian allies have slapped sanctions on Russian leaders, companies and businessmen, cutting off Russia from much of the world economy.

President Vladimir Putin says that what he calls the special military operation in Ukraine was necessary because the United States was using Ukraine to threaten Russia and Russia had to defend against the "genocide" of Russian-speaking people by Ukraine.

More nonsense/lies by Putin.

The International Court of Justice on Wednesday ordered Russia to stop all military actions in Ukraine tied to its February invasion of the country, and to revoke its claim that Ukrainian citizens requested Russia’s military support.

In a 13-2 ruling, the court found it had jurisdiction over Ukraine’s allegations that Russia falsely accused Ukraine of genocide to justify waging war on the former member of the Soviet Union. The court's judges voted 13-2 on the ruling.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/international-court-justice-ruling-ukraine-russia-143146573.html

 

[artis]

I would like to submit a modest proposal for evaluation on the merits by this august multitude:.

What if the bordering states (Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Finland and the Baltics) could be declared militarily unaligned? In my mind this would mean extremely limited numbers of foreign troops allowed and no nukes or other proxy weapons. They would otherwise be free to raise a local national army however they desire. Any attempts to circumvent this would cause immediate response from the offended side (NATO or Russian)

I am under no illusion that this would be simple. But is it a useful idea? Could it be made to work ?

/

Have you been consuming some of that "evidence" again lately, as you yourself once so eloquently put it...?

But jokes aside, I don't think any such plans work, first of all good luck trying to make us give our NATO membership up. Less weapons? Given we are already past any pre-war negotiation proposals everyone here now says one thing - give us more weapons.
Like in the Baltics back in the USSR times we had everything from radar to medium range ICBM's to SAM to some 400 000 infantry.
Now when we are independent and part of NATO we don't even have decent SAM's on our Russia border.
If anything NATO has been "asleep" until now somewhat so the recent texts from NATO that they will supply more troops and weapons are very welcome.

Your proposal only works if Russia had a decent safety oriented government that only had it's territorial interests in mind. Russia instead has an imperialistic government that with Putin as the "lead singer" understands it's territorial safety only in terms of expanding and dominating.
Under such conditions any neutrality is simply a weakness waiting to be exploited by Kremlin.

I'm afraid there is no other choice but fire against fire here, you cannot put a fire brigade up against an active volcano and say "now go and keep it from erupting"

I don't know where this will end for now but the way I see it is also how one former security analyst put it
1) Either Russian politics and government changes fundamentally or
2) There will come a moment where Russia will stand off with US and NATO militarily.

I dismissed such claims years ago as alarmist, I don't do so anymore.

 

[bob012345]

I would like to submit a modest proposal for evaluation on the merits by this august multitude:.

What if the bordering states (Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Finland and the Baltics) could be declared militarily unaligned? In my mind this would mean extremely limited numbers of foreign troops allowed and no nukes or other proxy weapons. They would otherwise be free to raise a local national army however they desire. Any attempts to circumvent this would cause immediate response from the offended side (NATO or Russian)

I am under no illusion that this would be simple. But is it a useful idea? Could it be made to work ?

/

The Baltic states are already in NATO. Finland is considering joining now. Belarus supports Russia.

If the West is going to let Putin's nuclear saber rattling to allow him to get away with anything just extrapolate that to its logical conclusion: Putin wins and gets everything he wants no matter the cost.

So the fear of a potential nuclear war means the West is impotent to stop this and future Russian aggression.

In my view the West should consider taking a calculated risk and call Putin's bluff by some form
of more direct involvement. The Korean War was under a United Nations mandate. Ukraine could be defended under a UN mandate using mainly Eastern European troops from Poland, Moldova, Romania and other surrounding nations instead of troops with American uniforms.

 

[artis]

In my view the West should consider taking a calculated risk and call Putin's bluff by some form
of more direct involvement. The Korean War was under a United Nations mandate. Ukraine could be defended under a UN mandate using mainly Eastern European troops from Poland, Moldova, Romania and other surrounding nations instead of troops with American uniforms.

If Putin doesn't stop this will eventually happen either way. It might not happen now but if he succeeds in Ukraine however high the cost , then years from now this scenario will likely play out only then on central European soil, read Poland, Croatia , Slovakia who knows Germany basically WW3.

 

[artis]

Just to recap what I think based on the expert opinion I have read so far without going en length with links etc.

Sanctions and Russian will alone won't topple Putin regime, at least not in the short term. The only viable way to stop Putin at least for the foreseeable years until we come up with new strategies is to make him lose in Ukraine. Many argue he loses in Ukraine either way and that might be true but a frozen Ukraine conflict where Russia controls most of the land is basically also a win for him so this only works if he fails to take Kyiv for example or loses so much militarily that his army is incapable of taking Kyiv in the months to come.
The only way to make this happen without direct NATO troop involvement (WW3) is to supply enough weapons to Ukraine in a short period of time. And give good weapons like SAM's ect not just some manpads and bullets for AK's as that alone won't be enough.

Just like Zelensky's advisor said "we have the will just give us the tools", it would be almost a cardinal sin to not use such a will. Imagine if the folks in Afghanistan had the same will and solidarity to fight the Taliban? The Taliban would be history by now.

If there is one thing clear then that is this - pretty much everyone in eastern Europe (except a portion of the Russian speaking part) would like to blow up a Russian tank if they saw one on the horizon. Ukraine is very united in this. It would be the greatest blunder for the west to miss this opportunity that is still available while the Ukrainians still have enough men capable of fighting.

 

[russ_watters]

If the West is going to let Putin's nuclear saber rattling to allow him to get away with anything just extrapolate that to its logical conclusion: Putin wins and gets everything he wants no matter the cost.

So the fear of a potential nuclear war means the West is impotent to stop this and future Russian aggression.

In my view the West should consider taking a calculated risk and call Putin's bluff by some form
of more direct involvement. The Korean War was under a United Nations mandate.

That's where I'm headed. Right now we're acting like this is just about Ukraine, and do we really want to risk nuclear war to save Ukraine. But that's not what this is about: we're setting up the new world order for potentially the next 40 years. And we're basically telling him he can have any country he wants as long as it's not in NATO and he's willing to accept economic isolation (except with China and other rogues). That's worse than the Cold War where almost all of the wars were proxies/overthrows. Is that really what we want the new world order to be?

 

[bob012345]

I wonder if in a future historical perspective from say 2050, we are already in WW3 and just don't admit it yet. Just as when you look at WW2 documentaries they always start with events in the 1920's and 1930's such as the invasion of Manchuria or the takeover of the Sudetenland or the anschluss of Austria leading up to the invasion of Poland. There are clear historical parallels to Putin's actions in the last 20 years such as the brutal suppression in Chechnya, the invasion of Georgia, takeover of Crimea.

Will the invasion of Ukraine ultimately be seen as a parallel to the German invasion of Poland? Putin, like Hitler, seems to operate in his own world of perceived grievances and historical justifications. Restore the Russian Empire. Lebensraum.

 

[artis]

That's where I'm headed. Right now we're acting like this is just about Ukraine, and do we really want to risk nuclear war to save Ukraine. But that's not what this is about: we're setting up the new world order for potentially the next 40 years. And we're basically telling him he can have any country he wants as long as it's not in NATO and he's willing to accept economic isolation (except with China and other rogues). That's worse than the Cold War where almost all of the wars were proxies/overthrows. Is that really what we want the new world order to be?

I'm afraid given where things are going now this is how the new world order will be one way or the other.
It's now about Russia and China, up til now China is playing both sides like a professional prostitute but how long until we find out who is the true ideological lover and who is just the "sidekick" for the money?
China has used western capital, acquired as well as stolen intellectual property to it's advantage but has not shared western values and keeps on going against them.

If China also keeps it's regime then it is safe to say they are ideologically much closer to Kremlin than the west. They did sort of split from the USSR back in the day but they kept all of the "playbooks" on how to run a regime, even more they bent like a snake to avoid collapse (allowed capitalism in) and refined those playbooks to become even stronger and more fault tolerant.
When looking at Russia and China I think the proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is correct. Both countries regimes stand to gain from a weakened US that is too busy to fight domestic political battles and ramp up it's ever growing debt.The phrase of NATO once was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down" , It seems to me that Russia and China want to "keep the Americans out, the Russians/Chinese in, and Europe down"

Anyway , what are the options for the west to keep the status quo on an ever more powerful Russia and China?

 

[bob012345]

Anyway , what are the options for the west to keep the status quo on an ever more powerful Russia and China?

This would be a great moment to have Nixon around to play Russia against China.

What I don't get is why the West doesn't have more leverage over China since we are by far the biggest trading partners?

 

[artis]

What I don't get is why the West doesn't have more leverage over China since we are by far the biggest trading partners?

Because the west outsourced too much of their "vital" manufacturing to China, much like with Russia in the 90's they thought that China will be their new friend and both will stand to gain lots of money while share a vine glass in the afternoon before "bed".
Turns out China did gain a lot of money but when it came time for some "friendship and vine" it smashed the bottle and threatened to cut west's throat. The way it seems to me.

I guess the morale of the story is "don't put greed above family and country" because if you do you risk to lose both

 

[artis]

 

[bob012345]

I guess the morale of the story is "don't put greed above family and country"

As Mr. Spock would say, indeed.

 

[hutchphd]

There are clear historical parallels to Putin's actions in the last 20 years such as the brutal suppression in Chechnya, the invasion of Georgia, takeover of Crimea.

By your definitions we have been in WW3 ever since eastern Europe was partitioned immediately following WWII. The Russian tanks rolled into Hungary under Stalin (1956) and Prague in 1968. Stalin blockaded food into west Berlin. Putin is just the most recent. It is more disappointing because it followed a very short but hopeful interlude in Russia. But steady pressure worked then.
I again remind everyone that we are given the privilege of breathing every morning because carefully measured policies prevailed over these intervening sixty-five years. Their were many times when a less prudent approach would have produced diseaster. Even the measured approach brought us perilously close to the unthinkable in 1962. And there were always always calls for more sabers.
This is an intelligent group. So I find these stated suppositions that we must stop Putin now and the seeming easy analyses that no nuclear exchange would result because he is bluffing to be chilling.
I am heartened that cool heads seem engaged for the moment.
Albert Einstein is often quoted as having said: "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones".

 

[gleem]

What I don't get is why the West doesn't have more leverage over China since we are by far the biggest trading partners?

I think it does. For now, talk is cheap and China can say what it wants. If China does do more than give moral support then it has a lot to risk. It, like the West, is economically strong but that is also a weakness at least psychologically. Ukraine is a strong China trader so it is surprising that they support Russia unless it falls to Russia. China has to be concerned about the use of nukes since it supposedly has a firm no first strike policy. Being in bed with a partner who might be willing to used nukes first is a bit puzzling. Did Russia give China assurance that it will not use nukes? Even if China is not involved in a nuclear exchange it will suffer greatly.

Of course, sanctioning China will have a great effect on the West. I think (hope) that Xi will try to maintain a rational position and not try and test the West like Putin.

 

[Vanadium 50]

What if the bordering states (Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Finland and the Baltics) could be declared militarily unaligned?

Why not just hang up a "Welcome, Putin" shingle?

Russia signed a treaty to ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity.. That wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

 

[Astronuc]

Russia is a huge liability to China. How big is to be determined.

This would be a great moment to have Nixon around to play Russia against China.

The situation with Putin is very different from those with his predecessors.

 

[gleem]

So far the West's response has been reactionary letting Putin have the initiative and except for the lack of progress not giving him much additional to think about. Since he has yet to go birds**t over the assistance Ukraine has received from the West, He probably anticipated it. The question then is who has "blood to spare"?

I had read that Russia has three nuclear footballs which all must be activated to launch a nuclear strike one for the president, one for the equivalent of the Sec. of Defense, and one for the Military Chief of Staff. Will all three put themselves in a position to guarantee the destruction of Russia for the sake of one lost venture?
Isn't it better to leave with your tail between your legs rather than no tail or legs?

While the best hope of avoiding the ultimate confrontation might be to eliminate Putin he has probably anticipated this having within the last year or so replaced about 1000 personnel who might have been too close to trust. As in any venture in which a surprise is essential only one person must act surreptitiously. As soon as two or more people know of the plan the chance of discovery increases dramatically.

 

[hutchphd]

Why not just hang up a "Welcome, Putin" shingle?

Russia signed a treaty to ensure Ukraine's territorial integrity.. That wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

Yes and Dean Rusk once remarked that the "Soviets had not violated all of their agreements, just most of them" Yet we are still trying.
So no more treaties? When this is ended there will be peace of some sort. That peace will requre constant vigilance regardless. How do we get from here to there?

 

[bob012345]

By your definitions we have been in WW3 ever since eastern Europe was partitioned immediately following WWII. The Russian tanks rolled into Hungary under Stalin (1956) and Prague in 1968. Stalin blockaded food into west Berlin. Putin is just the most recent. It is more disappointing because it followed a very short but hopeful interlude in Russia. But steady pressure worked then.
I again remind everyone that we are given the privilege of breathing every morning because carefully measured policies prevailed over these intervening sixty-five years. Their were many times when a less prudent approach would have produced diseaster. Even the measured approach brought us perilously close to the unthinkable in 1962. And there were always always calls for more sabers.
This is an intelligent group. So I find these stated suppositions that we must stop Putin now and the seeming easy analyses that no nuclear exchange would result because he is bluffing to be chilling.
I am heartened that cool heads seem engaged for the moment.
Albert Einstein is often quoted as having said: "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones".

It's not my definition, just an observation. But in a way we did enter a war right after WW2 which we called the Cold War which did have occasional hot flashes by proxy.

I heard a retired American General at the beginning of the invasion so worried about civilian casualties he suggested they just let the tanks roll in so no one would get hurt. I suggested a well calculated move under a UN mandate not a direct declaration of war by NATO on Russia. If cool heads means doing everything to avoid war then admit that means essentially just giving in. It is also appeasement which emboldens dictators.