War: Russia vs. Ukraine?

[stormwyrm]

If Putin is actively overthrown, he's not facing jail, much less a cosy retirement a la Yeltsin.

Thus Nevzorov's' 'joke'.

If that happens, if he doesn't escape, he'll be lucky if he only winds up the way St. Nicholas the Passion-Bearer did. Though probably no one will declare him a saint.

I can't think of anywhere Putin could run to for asylum should he be overthrown. Would Xi dare to give him sanctuary?

[TheGlyphstone]

Probably not. Xi seems to be a ruthlessly practical sort of autocratic, he gains very little by sheltering him and risks a lot, like continued trade with a post-Putin Russia. He might agree to host Putin in exile if it didn't threaten China's economic position but no further.

Either way though, are we all operating on the assumption that Putin is in too deep, that he can't placate the nationalists by abandoning the rest of Ukraine to occupy the hell out of Donbas and claim victory?

[midnightblack]

Either way though, are we all operating on the assumption that Putin is in too deep, that he can't placate the nationalists by abandoning the rest of Ukraine to occupy the hell out of Donbas and claim victory?

Hopefully I'm wrong but I don't see this ending any other way outside of Russia holding on to Crimeea and the Donbas in a prolonged/frozen conflict that will drag on at least until Putin physically expires. Anything else feels unrealistic at this point.

[Azuresun]

Hopefully I'm wrong but I don't see this ending any other way outside of Russia holding on to Crimeea and the Donbas in a prolonged/frozen conflict that will drag on at least until Putin physically expires. Anything else feels unrealistic at this point.

I'd be amazed if that doesn't happen soon as a result of a poisoning or other assassination, most likely from a KGB rival.

[midnightblack]

I'd be amazed if that doesn't happen soon as a result of a poisoning or other assassination, most likely from a KGB rival.

I highly doubt that as well. There is no alternative to Putin. Anyone who could have opposed him is dead, imprisoned or exiled. The people around him are extremely loyal and will likely follow him to the bitter end, just like Hitler's ghouls, and at the cost of completely destroying Russia. But it won't come to that either. Freezing the conflict in the Donbas appears to me the likeliest and possibly the best case scenario. Hopefully Russia doesn't have the means to mount another major offensive, at least not yet, but neither does Ukraine hold the resources to drive them out or deliver a crushing defeat somewhere. They need trained men, heavy equipment and supplies and I think they're short of everything right now. The EU is a bad joke at best in the way it's handling this and I don't know if the US isn't actually interested in keeping Putin stuck there for a while, as opposed to driven out.

[Vekseid]

Either way though, are we all operating on the assumption that Putin is in too deep, that he can't placate the nationalists by abandoning the rest of Ukraine to occupy the hell out of Donbas and claim victory?

I have doubts Russia will be able to hold onto Donbas. They still don't have full control of the region. Which is... something.

They could declare "No war - no peace" on May 9. It worked so well for Russia a century and change ago, why not repeat Trotsky's masterstroke?

There would be a delicious irony in it causing them to lose Ukraine a second time. This time forever.

[TheGlyphstone]

Putin was trying to take the entire country with 150,000 conscripts, though. If he collapses all his forces down to 10% of that, and brings in reserves from actual veteran units, he still wouldn't be able to hold it? The only wrinkle I'd expect might be if he needs those veteran units on duty to counter a potential internal coup.

[Numerion]

Putin was trying to take the entire country with 150,000 conscripts, though. If he collapses all his forces down to 10% of that, and brings in reserves from actual veteran units, he still wouldn't be able to hold it? The only wrinkle I'd expect might be if he needs those veteran units on duty to counter a potential internal coup.

See this is you believing their lies.

Russia has used 75% of their existing units to invade Ukraine so far. They also don't have a whole lot of actual combat veterans, because of bad policies in the past.
If he had experienced units to use, he would've used them by now. Instead he is pulling out units from the north and north east and will be trying to push them towards the east. He has a bit of the upper hand in that Ukrainians have to defend all of their territory, even west, just in case.

It will be bloody but he won't hold Donbass.

We shall see about Crimea.

[Vekseid]

Specifically, Russian leadership comes from the security state, so actively avoids glorifying the military and its soldiers. Veterans make them nervous, experienced, capable generals with loyal forces under their command are a nightmare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeXWbnA58Ow

This is the respect an officer gets when asking respect be given to the dead.

Russia is pulling military educators and students out of schools into the conflict.

Anything to avoid full mobilization. I've heard some claims of a 'secret mobilization', where they are trying to get about 60,000 more troops through various other means. It just isn't remotely enough.

I don't think Ukraine is recovering Crimea unless something drastic changes. An invasion of the Baltics (bringing NATO into the conflict) or an uprising in Crimea itself. It isn't impossible, but Zelensky has made it clear he doesn't want to sacrifice the lives necessary, and he seems to have a realistic understanding of the cost. For a population that probably doesn't want to join Ukraine - at least not now.

[TheGlyphstone]

I can't believe lies I haven't heard, I was going off the supposed prewar estimates of Russia having something like 900,000 troops on its rolls. Now I'm hearing that the 150k they sent in is 75% of their total force, which means the Russian military is 1/5 as large as we thought it was. If they are running that low on manpower, let alone morale, its an entirely different situation. I suspect if Putin did try for a full mobilization, the military might be the ones who revolt.

[Hades]

I looked around to see if I could find any estimates on the size of the Russian army and how it's manned.   According to a 2020 report from the Center for Strategic International Studies, Russia fielded an army of slightly under 700,000 soldiers.   With the numbers being 260,000 as conscripts that serve a 12-month period and 410,000 as contract/professional soldiers. This doesn't take into account Russia's equivalent units to the US National Guards or the like, or what could be called up in a national draft, but is only talking about their active army.   By comparison, the active US Army in 2021 was 485,000 soldiers.

I would guess the reason that Russia hasn't sent a massive surge of troops into Ukraine is because Putin is borderline paranoid about NATO nations along his borders.   Nevermind that his actions make direct NATO involvement more likely, he can't risk pulling troops away from positions along Poland or the Baltics because if NATO troops invaded it'd be very favorable terrain to march straight towards Moscow.  And so he has to keep troop levels there to levels where he believes they can mount a significant defense in the event of the war widening to involve the rest of Europe being a theater of operation. 

I suspect because Putin's advisors seemed to be the sort that told him what he wanted to hear (possibly out of fear for their own lives and possibly because they started to believe their own lies), Russian command believed they would face little opposition and would be welcomed as liberators.  At this point, even if they just stopped all their offenses and concentrated on holding what they've gained, I'm not sure they have enough troops to deal with the resistance such an occupation would generate.  Especially with events in Bucha fueling Ukrainian fervor and determination.

[Vekseid]

Sure, Russia has roughly a million personnel in active service. At the outset of the invasion, 280,000 of these were part of Russia's Ground Forces. The rest are Aerospace, Navy, Missile Command, Logistics, etc.

Their ground forces are divided into (among other divisions) Battalion Tactical Groups, as a rough measure of overall strength. Of the 168 on-paper groups Russia has, they sent about 120 in. So of the 190,000 troops sent in, only about 90k are the 'teeth' of the operation. This is where the 75% comes from. The rest are support units of various kinds, Rosgvardiya for pacifying places they occupy e.g. in Kherson, etc.

In theory, the units making two of these groups should be able to make a third in the event of mobilization, but 1) that isn't happening and 2) Russia's equipment isn't exactly making a stellar showing to support such expansion. It looks increasingly like stuff getting sent in is only going to replace losses.

So, they've got 90,000 actual combat troops in theater, assuming they've replaced everything, trying to hold a thousand kilometer front. Against an army that can probably swell to a couple million actual combat troops, if this goes into next year and Russia fully mobilizes to stop Ukraine.

Russia does have two million reservists they could, in theory, call up - what 'full mobilization' means. These aren't reservists like Western countries have; their skills aren't kept fresh. They'd be little more than conscripts, fighting against a highly experienced, highly motivated opponent.

[TheGlyphstone]

Thanks Veks, that helps a lot to put everything in context.

As far as I can see, Putin is up shit creek in every direction. He can't take Ukraine, he can't even hold Donbas, and if he backs off his own nationalists will crucify him.

There's a part of me that honestly worries he'll go nuclear in some fashion, as a last FU to the world or at least Ukraine. A  small part, I know how hideously unlikely it is, but men facing death with nuclear bombs and nothing to lose are not a great combination.

[Beorning]

Something regarding Russian nationalists:

Yesterday, Vladimir Zhirinovsky died. He was a key figure among Russian nationalists for years - and, while not a member of the Kremlin elite, he was loyal to Putin. A kind of opposition leader that wasn't really an opposition leader... someone whom Putin used to make sure that the nationalists wouldn't cause trouble for him. With Zhirinovsky dead, who knows what happens next? The nationalists could get out of Putin's leash...

[Azuresun]

I highly doubt that as well. There is no alternative to Putin. Anyone who could have opposed him is dead, imprisoned or exiled. The people around him are extremely loyal and will likely follow him to the bitter end, just like Hitler's ghouls, and at the cost of completely destroying Russia.

Here's the thing--the most important thing for a dictator is the image of strength, much more so than actually being strong. And when they come unglued, it happens FAST. The Russian army seemed like an invincible juggernaut until recently, and now that reputation is entirely shattered. Likely the same for Putin's political control--it will be absolute until very suddenly, it isn't.

[Crane]

We can certainly hope the loss of reputation on a global scale will impact Russia at home, or at least the sanctions bring further discontent to the oligarchs.

Estimates put Russia's losses as high as 15,000 (admittedly a high ballpark figure), which is pretty staggering for a single month.

[midnightblack]

Something regarding Russian nationalists:

Yesterday, Vladimir Zhirinovsky died. He was a key figure among Russian nationalists for years - and, while not a member of the Kremlin elite, he was loyal to Putin. A kind of opposition leader that wasn't really an opposition leader... someone whom Putin used to make sure that the nationalists wouldn't cause trouble for him. With Zhirinovsky dead, who knows what happens next? The nationalists could get out of Putin's leash...

Jirinovski wasn't a leader of anything for a very long time, if ever. He was simply a pawn, a court jester made to entertain a certain part of the Russian society, the one who wished to hear about Moldova being drowned in blood and Bucharest falling within 20 minutes from the start of an invasion, to quote just a few of his delirious ravings from over the years. We've had that kind of characters here as well. Largely irrelevant ex-communist troubadours, essentially second-hand moths, who were always activated by various political forces when it suited them best and then set in stand-by until further notice. Apart from the minor satisfaction of seeing one more dead fascist, his passing into the dustbin of history doesn't really mean much.

[Numerion]

We can certainly hope the loss of reputation on a global scale will impact Russia at home, or at least the sanctions bring further discontent to the oligarchs.

Estimates put Russia's losses as high as 15,000 (admittedly a high ballpark figure), which is pretty staggering for a single month.

Mind that the "common" calculation is that for every loss, you also have ~3 wounded and captured. Now we know that Russia doesn't exactly have good logistics so the ratio could be slightly worse, but even at ~2 times as much, we are looking at :

19k dead (from today's UA numbers)
38k wounded and captured

That's ~60 thousand.

Awfully close to the number some are claiming Ol' Poots is trying to get to join the fight, isn't it?

[Vekseid]

That'd be 19k/57k.

However, the leaked Russian source suggested they are experiencing a 2:3 ratio of killed and wounded. There are a number of reasons to believe this, various factors do increase fatalities on the Russian side that would be injuries in the West and even Ukraine. They may also be forcing people to fight even with injuries we'd discharge people for in the West.

That said, this also doesn't include the number lost to capturing or desertion. So I expect they've lost around 50k troops all told so far.

[Oniya]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/08/congress-sanction-war-putin-00023966

The US Congress has nearly unanimously passed a bill regarding sanctions on the Soviets - it's heading for Biden's desk.  In addition, the Senate has unanimously passed a bill to resurrect the Lend-Lease program that was instrumental in WWII.  That one is heading to the House, but may not get acted on before the recess.

[Vekseid]

The House is already in recess until the 26th, so it's not getting passed until then.

That said, its purpose is so Biden doesn't need continual congressional authorization for everything, through at least 2023. It's also backdated, so unless the handful of Putin-aligned representatives manages to stall it (they won't), it isn't holding up anything.

[Vekseid]

One thing I noticed regarding the act.

It isn't limited to Ukraine. Supply is authorized to any Eastern European nation.

[Beorning]

On less analytical side - here's a song Pink Floyd released in support of Ukraine:

Hey Hey Rise Up

https://youtu.be/saEpkcVi1d4

[Oniya]

For those curious, the lyrics that are being sung are from Oi u luzi cherviba kalyna - referenced in the opening splash.  (I was expecting some additions from the band other than the instrumentals - Pink Floyd has a rather lengthy history of anti-war themes.)

[Beorning]

And here's something completely baffling...

Maria Zakharova, the spokeswoman for Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recently gave a rant connecting the Ukrainian "Nazism" and "extremism" with the supposed unwillingness to share the recipe for bortsch:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-claims-ukraines-refusal-to-share-borscht-proves-nazism

I've seen people on the web comment that Zakharova looks drunk in this speech. I don't know, personally... In any case, this whole thing is utterly bizarre.