The War in Europe

Tensions surge after breakaway Moldovan region reports attacks; Kyiv blames Russia | Reuters, reports Reuters. There were a series of attacks in Transdniestria, a small region of Moldova held by Russia since the breakup of the Soviet Union. Two Russian radio masts were damaged. And the Transdniestria Security Council reported a "terrorist attack" on one of its military units near Tiraspol, Moldova's largest city. Tiraspol is about 80 miles northwest of Ukraine's Odessa, which is on the Black Sea.There are concerns that Russia might carry out a false flag operation on itself to provide an excuse for an invasion of Moldova.--Percy

[tongue-in-cheeck] Russia says Ukraine war could go nuclear if West keeps sending weapons - CBS News, indicating that it is lowering the bar for what armaments it will permit western nations to provide Ukraine. Previously Russia would not permit provision of highly capable weapons, but now apparently no weapons at all are permitted.Russia informed the west that continued military aid to Ukraine risked nuclear war, a possibility that "should not be underestimated." NATO nation's are "pouring oil on the fire" and risking "World War III." The west dare not risk nuclear war or WWIII, so it has no choice but to cease military aid to Ukraine.[/tongue-in-cheek]--Percy

It's almost as if Russia doesn't understand what war is. "What? If we invade they can attack us back? But, but, that's not fair."In related news, the attacks on Bryansk, oil depots about 70 miles deep into Russia, and other targets could have been carried out by Tochkas, ancient Soviet era surface-to-surface ballistic missiles with 250-pound warheads that have been upgraded over the years. Ukraine is thought to have 90 launchers and 500 missiles.Concerning other recent Russian noise, it's no surprise that since we stopped self-enforcement of the "keep Russia mollified because, you know, nukes" rule that Russia is reminding us of it.--Percy

The Washington Post editorial board took up the topic of Moldova today (Russian aggression may have a new target). Moldova is a snippet of a country between Ukraine and Romania about the size of South Carolina. It is agrarian and poor. They depend upon Russia for energy and have maintained a neutral stance, though they're accepting Ukrainian refugees. A lengthy sliver of a region called Transnistria on it's northeast quarter is occupied by Russia and has been since the breakup of the Soviet Union, here's a map. For those curious about Gagauzia, it's a distinct ethnic region with a complex political history that at present is part of Moldova: The editorial concludes:

quote:

---

Western policy failed to respond strongly enough, soon enough, to deter Moscow’s machinations against Ukraine after it took Crimea and Donbas in 2014. Hence the disaster now unfolding across Europe and, indeed, the world. There would be no excuse for making the same mistake twice.

---

But the west has made the mistake far more than twice. There's Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea and Donbas, and you could even include Syria, a whole series of mistakes, and looming over it all is the monumental calamity of appeasement on the eve of WWII, still the archetype. Someone above said something about punching a bully in the nose, and it's the proper sentiment. Expressed less colloquially it means that if countries conducting foreign policy through military means experience no consequences they will be encouraged to do it again. And again.--Percy

Said Han Solo to Luke Skywalker (not the exact quote, but I like this mutated version better). I don't understand the confidence about the Ukraine conflict. Russia is an enormous country of immense natural resources, including fossil fuels from which it continues to bring in $2 or $3 billion a week and which it can use as leverage against western supporters of Ukraine. Even assuming all the stories of Russian stupidity and incompetence are true, how much less effective a fighting force does it really make them?Russia is also enormously resourceful financially. The much anticipated debt default was forestalled when Russia managed a surprise dollar-denominated payment yesterday from currency reserves residing outside the country.One additional effective thing we could do to help Ukraine is get the truth to more of the Russian people. I think Radio Liberty is all Internet and streaming now. Poking around on the Internet I see that Russia has blocked access to the BBC and Voice of America websites, and Radio Free Europe shut down Russian operations. Putin signed a bill some years ago prohibiting use of VPNs. Apparently something called Deep Packet Inspection enables the detection of VPN, and there are probably legal deterrents, too.--Percy

Recent discussion reminds me of this quote: There's another quote that doesn't apply as well here, and the attribution is even more unclear: But it does have the same problem that after a while you can't tell which is which.--Percy

It was nice to see some clear statements on appeasement after Russia's recent nuclear saber rattliing. This is from Putin is inching towards his nukes, threatening to annihilate the world if he fails to capture Ukraine, says foreign affairs expert:

quote:

---

Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, said that the risk of a global nuclear war is very real. This ominous warning came not from some deranged psychopath – like the ones who regularly demand Kyiv to be nuked on Russian state TV. These were the words of the top diplomat of the Russian Federation.
...
Giving in to the terrorist’s demands is out of the question, it would only embolden him to make further demands, and inspire copycats. Sooner or later, the world will have to call his bluff at one red line or another, risking a global nuclear war. The only difference is that the longer we appease the terrorist, the more powerful he becomes, and the weaker and more demoralized the rest of the world will be. Appeasement is not an option.

---

That declarations that we can't arm Ukraine in earnest "because, you know, nukes" have been diminishing has been welcome, and it's good to see the media more vigorously taking up what's been obvious about appeasement for a couple months now.I don't agree with the articles optimism about the eventual outcome in Ukraine.--Percy

I don't pretend to have any insights into how earnest are Putin's nuclear threats. I just don't think we should let threats dictate policy, no matter how serious they're judged to be. They should be just one of many inputs into policy. We were letting fear of escalation of tensions into conflict between the US and Russia drive us into an arms length support of Ukraine. The possibility of escalation, including nuclear, must be factored in, but it cannot be the sole or overriding factor. Europe and the US seem finally to have realized the disastrous political, economic and military consequences were Ukraine to be absorbed into Russia.What apparently convinced the west to provide serious support was Ukraine's success on the battlefield. Until then the west seemed prepared to let Ukraine go, believing that it would take only a matter of days for Ukraine's major cities to fall. But Ukraine's ability to defend itself, or not, is completely unrelated to how important Ukraine is as a buffer for the west against Russian exploitation, adventurism and expansionism. That's been true since Putin proved his true nature beginning in the early 2000's.Biden's culpable in this. We were already providing a modicum of support during the Obama and Trump years in order to help Ukraine fend off Russian incursions in the Donbas region, but it was only enough to force an impasse with Ukraine, they unable to secure their territory and Russia not yet ready to escalate sufficiently to complete the takeover. Biden should have made it US foreign policy that Ukraine survive as an independent nation. He instead continued a deferential foreign policy for fear of provoking Russia.--Percy

That's true, he didn't continue that. What he did he did collectively with the rest of NATO, which was not to grasp the essential nature of Ukraine as a buffer against Russia until Russia tried to take it away. Despite Russia's taking of Crimea and fomenting rebellion in the Donbas region, they didn't really believe Russia would try to take Ukraine until Russia actually tried to.And anyone who did believe Russia would try to take Ukraine probably believed it would be impossible to keep free because it woudl be unable to defend itself and was too remote to be defended by others. They'd also be fearful of being accused by allies of provoking Russia by calling it a threat. This is the uphill battle anyone, including Biden, would have faced had they decided keeping Ukraine free was critical.The problem of grasping the essential nature of Ukraine was exacerbated by the slow pace of the advancing threat. The conflict with Georgia in 2008 was short-lived. The conflict between Russia and Chechnya had a recent phase that only ended a few years ago, but they've been warring for over a century. Then in 2014 there was the taking of Crimea and the beginning of fomenting unrest in the Donbas region. It all seemed slow burning and slow moving and not a significant threat to western security. No one foresaw a full scale invasion of Ukraine on the horizon, not even Ukraine itself.But isn't that why we have a State Department, a CIA, an NSA, etc? Shouldn't agencies like the CIA and the NSA been feeding the State Department information that would have led them to a) see the critical role Ukraine plays in western security, and b) that Russia was becoming an increasing threat to Ukraine. Of course, there is the problem that much of Russia's plans reside only in Putin's head.--Percy

"Clueless" isn't the word I would have chosen, but they certainly haven't covered themselves with glory. Well, yes. In hindsight events have revealed to everyone that past positions and actions were inappropriate or inadequate. What we know now the professionals should have known a long time ago. I did give the pros an out, concluding with a comment that Putin keeps his plans to himself.Except that he didn't. Putin wrote a paper about a year ago, On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians, where he calls Russians and Ukrainians "one people." He argues that much of Ukraine occupies land that historically belongs to Russia and that "Russia was robbed." He declares that Ukraine "simply does not need Donbas." He says Ukraine exists as a state only by Moscow's consent.--Percy

This seems an impulsive and irritated response that doesn't address anything I actually said, but I see it got four likes. Perhaps if people can explain what they liked about it I'll be able to figure out what there is of value in it to respond to. Right now it just looks like your standard "get hyper-aggressive and critical at anything you disagree with."--Percy

Does holding such views turn someone into a valid target for sniper/hand grenade style posts, so much so that you tag likes to such posts? No, he really wasn't. It looks to me that you and others tagged a like on a hateful and abusive post that misrepresented its target. I'm trying to understand why people would do that.What he did do was assign me an answer and then attack it as if I had offered it myself: "Economic and diplomatic sanctions for Russia having made no move? What gives NATO the right etc..." I'm not the one who got hyper-aggressive and abusive, so why are you saying this to me? Is it because I hold a view you disagree with, that Biden and NATO deserve blame for letting their guard down? If not then please explain what's really up, because it sure seems that way to me.I haven't had a chance to say it yet, but I also believe a number of EU countries deserve blame for become increasingly dependent upon Russian fossil fuels even while Russia was becoming more and more threatening.And about being on the same side, I don't have a side, except of reasoned discussion.--Percy

From White House walks a fine line with intelligence sharing in Ukraine:

quote:

---

But the effort raises questions about how far the White House is willing to go to help Ukraine fight the Russians while also trying to avoid provoking Moscow and getting drawn into the conflict.

​

Administration officials insist there are clear limits on the intelligence it shares with Ukraine, including a ban against providing precision targeting intelligence for senior Russian leaders by name, part of a White House effort to avoid crossing a line that Moscow may view as too escalatory.

---

—Percy

US government officials have revealed that they've been providing the intelligence for targeting high Russian military officers without giving away specific names. They also provided the intelligence that resulted in the sinking of the Moskva.In other news, despite the incompetent, decrepit and weakened condition of the Russian military, headlines here in the states announce that the west is bracing for an escalation of hostilities by Russia, e.g., Ukraine lays out peace-talk demands as the West braces for escalation.--Percy

More on how we continue to rein in how far we're willing to go from US mulls what Putin's end game might look like as war in Ukraine grinds on:

quote:

---

Administration officials have previously insisted there are clear limits on the intelligence it shares with Ukraine, including a ban on providing precision targeting intelligence for senior Russian leaders by name. Those limits are part of a White House effort to avoid crossing a line that Moscow may view as too escalatory.

---

By holding on far beyond what anyone expected at the outset Ukraine is saving itself politically (for the time being) but suffering great physical devastation. For Russia the war is going far worse than expected at the outset, but they continue to make slow progress and rain destruction on Ukraine daily.Also from the article:

quote:

---

CIA Director Bill Burns shared similar concerns over the weekend, describing Putin "in a frame of mind in which he doesn't believe he can afford to lose."

​

"I think he's convinced right now that doubling down still will enable him to make progress," Burns said.

---

Clearly the administration believes Russia is capable of taking the war to another level. Whether they will or not depends upon many factors, most importantly the cost at home both economically and politically.--Percy