Ukraine

[Max Peck]

I'm sure this will all end well...

Ukraine's Zelensky picks TV colleagues for presidential staff

Ukraine's new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has announced his administration - and several positions have gone to his former TV colleagues.

His only political experience until now has been playing the role of president in the Servant of the People TV show.

The deputy head of the presidency, Serhiy Trofimov, was a producer in Mr Zelensky's Kvartal 95 studio.

A scriptwriter, studio co-founder, and producer were also awarded roles in the administration or as aides.

He has also given the job of deputy head of Ukraine's SBU security service to an old friend, Ivan Bakanov, who ran the TV studio and set up his political party.

Not all positions have gone to former entertainment professionals.

Andriy Bohdan, a lawyer who previously worked for one of Ukraine's richest men, Ihor Kolomoisky, and who had a role in Mr Zelensky's election campaign was handed the key role as head of the administration.

[coopasonic]

When I become president, my cabinet will all be GG/OO regulars. A few of them would even pass muster.

The rest, one hopes, would pass the mustard.

[Isgrimnur]

BBC

Anti-terrorism police in northern Italy have seized an air-to-air missile and other sophisticated weapons during raids on far-right extremist groups.

Three people were arrested, two of them near Forli airport. Neo-Nazi propaganda was also seized, in the raids.

The raids were part of an investigation into Italian far-right help for Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine, local media said.

The missile was one of those used by the Qatari army, Italian police said.
...
Italian media named those arrested as Fabio Del Bergiolo, 50, an Italian ex-customs officer and far-right Forza Nuova party activist; Alessandro Monti, 42, a Swiss national; and Fabio Bernardi, 51, also Italian.

The missile appears to be a French-made Matra Super 530 F.

[hepcat]

When I become president, my cabinet will all be GG/OO regulars. A few of them would even pass muster.

The rest, one hopes, would pass the mustard.

I refuse to be your Ivanka.

[Max Peck]

For Ukraine's leader, Trump memo on their call is a diplomatic car crash

For U.S. President Donald Trump, White House publication on Wednesday of a memo summarizing his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy fueled a domestic political crisis.

For Zelenskiy, it was a far-reaching diplomatic disaster.

Zelenskiy’s comments to the Republican Trump, disclosed in the summary, will likely irk U.S. Democrats, risking the bipartisan U.S. support Kiev requires while irritating France and Germany whom Zelenskiy criticized in the same exchange.

Locked in a geopolitical standoff with neighboring Russia after Moscow annexed the Crimea region and backed pro-Russian separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine in 2014, Ukraine needs all the international friends it can get.

It relies heavily on Washington for aid and diplomatic help, and European countries like France and Germany are trying to help bring about talks aimed at breathing life into a stalled peace process over eastern Ukraine.

“Unfortunately the main consequence of this is that Ukraine could become toxic,” said Alyona Getmanchuk, director of the New Europe Center in Ukraine.

“Maybe not as toxic as Russia became during the Mueller investigation, but toxic,” she said, referring to a two-year U.S. investigation into contacts between Trump’s successful 2016 election campaign and Russia.

[Max Peck]

Russian 'troop build-up' near Ukraine alarms Nato

Russia has warned Nato against sending any troops to help Ukraine, amid reports of a large Russian military build-up on its borders.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia would take "additional measures" if Nato were to make such a move.

Sporadic, low-level clashes continue in eastern Ukraine between Ukrainian troops and Russian-backed separatists.

US forces in Europe are now on higher alert, citing "escalations of Russian aggression" in the area.

A Nato official told Reuters news agency that Russia was undermining efforts to reduce tensions in eastern Ukraine and Nato ambassadors had met on Thursday to discuss the situation.

"Allies share their concerns about Russia's recent large-scale military activities in and around Ukraine," the official said.

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky joined the criticism, saying "military exercises and possible provocations along the border are traditional Russian games".

Meanwhile, Mr Peskov accused Ukrainian forces of staging "provocations" on the frontline in eastern Ukraine, where a fragile ceasefire is violated daily.

In the worst flare-up in recent months, four Ukrainian soldiers died in separatist shelling on 26 March near Shuma, a village in the Donetsk region. There have been only low-level incidents since then.

[Daehawk]

F Russia. Dont sit there and be told what to do. Fill Ukraine up with NATO troops. Its like if Hitler had told the UK "Dont send troops to France" while building up a force on the border. Ukraine is an allied nation..help them you sissies.

[malchior]

Ukraine isn't a NATO member which complicates measures greatly. And everyone has to read the situation carefully. It sure looks like Putin might be testing the reaction and resolve of a weakened and politically unstable United States and its relationship with NATO.

[dbt1949]

Is the Ukraine an allied nation? Like with treaties and such.

[malchior]

Is the Ukraine an allied nation? Like with treaties and such.

Not as such. They have been aligning with the West since Yanukovych was kicked out (sometime in 2014 or 2015 IIRC) but Russia wasn't too thrilled with it and was using Russian energy reserves as a bargaining chip/implicit threat with the EU nations to forestall Ukrainian NATO membership. It's complicated.

[Holman]

Plus Russian-aligned separatists already control the regions of Russia that Putin cares about. If Zelensky moves into the Donbass with greater force, he'll be offering Putin a chance to claim that Russia is "protecting" an ethnic Russian region that wishes independence from Kiev. They've been laying the groundwork long enough that this will be plausible to many on the world stage.

The danger is that Zelensky *might* be trying to force a military crisis for his domestic political purposes, but I don't know enough about the politics to know what's what.

[Kraken]

Beau did a video on this topic yesterday, in which he said we should expect provocations from our various adversaries as they test Biden's mettle -- and ideally try to provoke mobilization. You get lots of valuable intelligence when your adversary scrambles. There's always a risk that things go a step farther than you want, but by and large the powers are not inclined to risk war with one another. Rather, they will posture for their respective domestic audiences. Expect similar moves from China and North Korea (which has already begun lobbing missiles again)...as well as from the US.

[Holman]

In the simplest terms, years ago Putin chose to meddle with a non- Western alliance member. In theory, we should have organized political pressure and sanctions, which (under Obama) is exactly what we did. Putin and his cronies suffered.

Under Trump, sanctions became less severe and Putin made political gains in the West. He might even (har har) have installed his favored candidate and policies in the White House.

Now, we're back to the previous regime. The question is (as it always has been), is military action preferable to anything sanctions can accomplish?

[Grifman]

There's a lot of bellicose talk from Russians in this article, but basically, they want the surrender of the West, which is just crazy. Russia's GDP is 5% of the combined US/EU GDP - if it came to a real war, they would be crushed. The Russians in this article acknowledge that they are weaker economically but for some reason seem to believe they can threaten the US/EU with some sort of violent action that won't be seen as war. All that said, according to the ultimatum they have made of the US, Putin basically believes he can demand a virtual surrender of the US/EU, which is absurd. But he's trying - it sounds like Russian goals go far beyond Ukraine, that's just for starters:



I do have one concern though that is sort of hinted at here - what if Russia does take some sort of coordinated action with China - they move on Eastern Europe while the Chinese move on Taiwan? That would be a nightmare for the US.

[malchior]

There's a lot of bellicose talk from Russians in this article, but basically, they want the surrender of the West, which is just crazy. Russia's GDP is 5% of the combined US/EU GDP - if it came to a real war, they would be crushed.

There is no conflict possible where the West and Russia trade shots. The relative size of their economies is entirely meaningless in this analysis. The Russians have outsized influence over affairs based on several factors such as energy, cyber capabilities (though ours are pretty great too), but ultimately they have a nuclear arsenal. Everyone knows they aren't actually asking for surrender of the west. They are saber rattling like they always do.

The Russians in this article acknowledge that they are weaker economically but for some reason seem to believe they can threaten the US/EU with some sort of violent action that won't be seen as war.

They supply energy to the west and they routinely threaten to curtail deliveries. Cutting off energy would another action be tantamount to an attack but wouldn't be treated that way because...again it just can't escalate to actual combat. It's the unthinkable scenario. Also they are constantly attacking infrastructure but not badly enough to really escalate things. They are good at provocation up to the line.

All that said, according to the ultimatum they have made of the US, Putin basically believes he can demand a virtual surrender of the US/EU, which is absurd. But he's trying - it sounds like Russian goals go far beyond Ukraine, that's just for starters:



I do have one concern though that is sort of hinted at here - what if Russia does take some sort of coordinated action with China - they move on Eastern Europe while the Chinese move on Taiwan? That would be a nightmare for the US.

It'd be a nightmare but it's so unlikely. There are limits here. Everyone's words are backed with nuclear weapons. The smart money is Putin wants to establish a buffer, maybe catch us napping/test our resolve, grab some more territory at best, and at worst bank some bragging rights back home. This is what Putin does. The realignment with China is a concern but more because it might turn into economic aid at large scale and undermine our only semi-effective tool to contain Putin - sanctions.

Edit: One other aspect is that Putin sees the weak spots in the relationships inside NATO. They were badly rattled by Trump and Putin is pressing on those buttons. He is setting himself up in a position to take opportunities if he can as well. Best case for him is the US does something crazy like re-elect Trump or impeach Biden in 2023 or whatever and make NATO question the relationship in a real way. And that's not a crazy strategy considering how dysfunctional we actually are.

[Holman]

Semi-optimistic take:

I assume that Putin's immediate endgame is Western recognition (even if just tacit) of their occupation of Donbas and Crimea. This would be a huge domestic win and a humiliation of local rivals.

Even if they don't gain a further land corridor between Donbas and Crimea, the territory they currently occupy gives them an opening onto the Sea of Azov and thus a route to Crimea, where the major Black Sea naval bases are.

All this could be done by just stretching out the time. It doesn't require a war, just acceptance of the facts on the ground.

[malchior]

Semi-optimistic take:

I assume that Putin's immediate endgame is Western recognition (even if just tacit) of their occupation of Donbas and Crimea. This would be a huge domestic win and a humiliation of local rivals.

Even if they don't gain a further land corridor between Donbas and Crimea, the territory they currently occupy gives them an opening onto the Sea of Azov and thus a route to Crimea, where the major Black Sea naval bases are.

All this could be done by just stretching out the time. It doesn't require a war, just acceptance of the facts on the ground.

I've seen this thrown around a lot and think it is plausible but my gut feeling is the risk/reward ratio is off here. He's pushing buttons and seeing how the hand plays out and will maximize opportunities along the way.

[malchior]

Semi-optimistic take:

I assume that Putin's immediate endgame is Western recognition (even if just tacit) of their occupation of Donbas and Crimea. This would be a huge domestic win and a humiliation of local rivals.

Even if they don't gain a further land corridor between Donbas and Crimea, the territory they currently occupy gives them an opening onto the Sea of Azov and thus a route to Crimea, where the major Black Sea naval bases are.

All this could be done by just stretching out the time. It doesn't require a war, just acceptance of the facts on the ground.

I've seen this thrown around a lot and think it is plausible but my gut feeling is the risk/reward ratio is off here. My main gut feel still is he's pushing buttons, seeing how the hand plays out, and will attempt to maximize opportunities along the way but 100% agree he is looking to bank some victories back home.

[Smoove_B]

I can't help but shake the feeling things are about to get nutty:

President Biden has been clear with the Russian President: If any Russian military forces move across the Ukrainian border, that’s a renewed invasion, and it will be met with a swift, severe, and united response from the United States and our Allies. President Biden also knows from long experience that the Russians have an extensive playbook of aggression short of military action, including cyberattacks and paramilitary tactics. And he affirmed today that those acts of Russian aggression will be met with a decisive, reciprocal, and united response.

[malchior]

Washington Post

Several Ukrainian government agencies had their data wiped in a cyberattack that was coordinated with another attack that defaced government agency websites in recent days, according to the Ukrainian government and other individuals familiar with the incident.

The actor behind those attacks has not been officially determined, although the Ukrainian government has said it believes Russia is responsible.

The cyber aggression comes as Kyiv braces for a potential invasion by Russia, which has close to 100,000 troops massed on its border with Ukraine.

The presence of destructive malware on dozens of computers belonging to several Ukrainian government agencies was first reported by Microsoft in a blog post late Saturday. That malware, which Microsoft dubbed WhisperGate, “has been recorded in several institutions that have become victims of the attack,” the State Service of Special Communications and Information Protection of Ukraine said in a statement on Tuesday.

[malchior]

Ukraine in 'shock' - (link is to a CNN video report from on ground reporter expressing Ukraine's dismay at Biden's remarks today). The White House is now backtracking because some believed that Biden implicitly greenlit an 'incursion' into Ukraine. The remarks that prompted this concern appeared to be off the cuff in response to a question where he was trying to shade the grey of the situation. The problem is that they appeared careless to our partners. And the WH less than an hour later is clarifying that he wasn't softening.

Politico

The White House on Wednesday sought to clarify President Joe Biden’s comments about a potential Russian invasion into Ukraine, after Biden said the U.S. response would depend on the severity of Russia’s actions.

“President Biden has been clear with the Russian President: If any Russian military forces move across the Ukrainian border, that’s a renewed invasion, and it will be met with a swift, severe, and united response from the United States and our Allies,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement. “President Biden also knows from long experience that the Russians have an extensive playbook of aggression short of military action, including cyberattacks and paramilitary tactics. And he affirmed today that those acts of Russian aggression will be met with a decisive, reciprocal, and united response.”

The statement came less than an hour after Biden wrapped up a marathon news conference, in which he said Russia would be held “accountable” for invading — though he added that the U.S. response would depend on the nature of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s actions. National Security Council spokesperson Emily Horne took to Twitter during the news conference to clarify that Biden was talking about the difference between “military and non-military/para-military/cyber action by the Russians.”


“Russia will be held accountable if it invades, and it depends on what it does,” Biden said, when asked how he would hold Russia accountable for an invasion.

“It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion, and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera. But if they actually do what they’re capable of doing with the force amassed on the border, it is going to be a disaster for Russia.”

[xwraith]

BBC -- US airlifting 'lethal aid' to Ukraine

The Guardian -- US embassy in Ukraine ‘requests staff evacuation’ amid war fears

[El Guapo]

So if Putin does indeed decide to invade Ukraine, what are our options as a practical matter? Obviously we'll impose sanctions of some type, which will hurt Putin and his inner circle somewhat but obviously do nothing to stop the actual invasion. I expect that we'll step up military aid to Ukraine significantly, and increase NATO deployments to areas that Putin would like us out of (including Poland and the Baltic States). This all has a cost for Russia, but for the most part it won't stop the invasion itself (I'm assuming that the Ukraine can't realistically hold out against Russia even with major U.S. military aid). But at the same time seems unlikely that we'd deploy combat troops to the Ukraine or provide air support to Ukraine, right?

Would the real strategy ultimately be to bleed Russia through the cost of sanctions and by supporting a Ukrainian insurgency?

[Daehawk]

Wish we'd kick Putins ass and shut him up for good.

[Little Raven]

So if Putin does indeed decide to invade Ukraine, what are our options as a practical matter?

Extremely limited.

• Our usual sanctions: This won't cost anything, but won't do anything either. We risk appearing weak, and emboldening Russia and perhaps especially China.
• Actual, REAL sactions that would actually really hurt the oligarchs under Putin: This is possible, but would require a level of commitment we haven't mustered in decades. And while it would hurt Russia badly, it would hurt us too - our banking industry in particular is practically addicted to Russian dark money. In addition to the costs, we risk widening the divide among EU powers on how to deal with Russia, as the pain of this approach would not fall everywhere equitably.
• Actual, real military involvement: Virtually nobody believes America will send its sons and daughters to die in the Ukraine, but it's technically possible. Some will say this risks WW III, but I think that's pretty unlikely. But even without THAT risk, the risks are astoundingly high - shattering the EU is not off the table. And that's assuming we WIN - not a particularly good assumption, given our track record.

[Roman]

[*]Actual, REAL sactions that would actually really hurt the oligarchs under Putin: This is possible, but would require a level of commitment we haven't mustered in decades. And while it would hurt Russia badly, it would hurt us too - our banking industry in particular is practically addicted to Russian dark money. In addition to the costs, we risk widening the divide among EU powers on how to deal with Russia, as the pain of this approach would not fall everywhere equitably.

What are actual sanctions that WILL hurt? I’ve no idea and am curious.

[malchior]

[*]Actual, real military involvement: Virtually nobody believes America will send its sons and daughters to die in the Ukraine, but it's technically possible. Some will say this risks WW III, but I think that's pretty unlikely.

It won't happen. Any risk of nuclear war has been an essential limitation to our ability to use military force as a direct tool. Technical support, volunteers, organizational support, etc. are all on the table. Still there will not be direct combat between NATO and Russia forces.

[malchior]

[*]Actual, REAL sactions that would actually really hurt the oligarchs under Putin: This is possible, but would require a level of commitment we haven't mustered in decades. And while it would hurt Russia badly, it would hurt us too - our banking industry in particular is practically addicted to Russian dark money. In addition to the costs, we risk widening the divide among EU powers on how to deal with Russia, as the pain of this approach would not fall everywhere equitably.

What are actual sanctions that WILL hurt? I’ve no idea and am curious.

Things that'd directly impact citizens or the overall economy of Russia. Which is why this is another thing that won't happen. Even if they weren't holding Europe's energy leash they have a capable nuclear arsenal. Anything "real" is off-limits.

[El Guapo]

So if Putin does indeed decide to invade Ukraine, what are our options as a practical matter?

Extremely limited.

• Our usual sanctions: This won't cost anything, but won't do anything either. We risk appearing weak, and emboldening Russia and perhaps especially China.
• Actual, REAL sactions that would actually really hurt the oligarchs under Putin: This is possible, but would require a level of commitment we haven't mustered in decades. And while it would hurt Russia badly, it would hurt us too - our banking industry in particular is practically addicted to Russian dark money. In addition to the costs, we risk widening the divide among EU powers on how to deal with Russia, as the pain of this approach would not fall everywhere equitably.
• Actual, real military involvement: Virtually nobody believes America will send its sons and daughters to die in the Ukraine, but it's technically possible. Some will say this risks WW III, but I think that's pretty unlikely. But even without THAT risk, the risks are astoundingly high - shattering the EU is not off the table. And that's assuming we WIN - not a particularly good assumption, given our track record.

How would military action shatter the EU, out of curiosity?

But given all this, what is our best option (even if it's not >50% likely to succeed) to prevent Putin from successful regime change in Ukraine? Is funding a sustained anti-Russia insurgency feasible?

[Carpet_pissr]

But given all this, what is our best option (even if it's not >50% likely to succeed) to prevent Putin from successful regime change in Ukraine?

The Cyber

[malchior]

How would military action shatter the EU, out of curiosity?

It probably won't. If anything, this little move by Putin has strengthened NATO and the US leadership role. Which will all be for naught if Trump or some anti-NATO moron were to appear again. I'd pay to be a fly on a wall in the discussions happening over the last few months because the desire to hedge against the chance that the USA goes off the rails in the next 10 years has got to be weighing heavily on the minds of strategic folks in European capitals everywhere right now.

This little crisis is making them recognize they have big, big problems energy-wise. I won't be shocked if they aren't about to make huge changes to their energy policies - for instance potentially halting denuclearization in their energy industries and increasing the EV push on the back of this.

[dbt1949]

I think Russia will have a limited incursion and I think Nato will support the Ukraine with air power and cruise missiles. Russia just can't turn back now. Putin and Russia would lose face.

[Pyperkub]

Don't think it will matter much as deterrence, but it's nice to see:

Hacktivists in Belarus said on Monday they had infected the network of the country’s state-run railroad system with ransomware and would provide the decryption key only if Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko stopped aiding Russian troops ahead of a possible invasion of Ukraine.

[malchior]

I think Russia will have a limited incursion and I think Nato will support the Ukraine with air power and cruise missiles.

Not happening. We'd give them the planes and cruise missiles first but we aren't launching/controlling them.

Russia just can't turn back now. Putin and Russia would lose face.

They probably will invade. Putin very much wants to restore a puppet regime in Ukraine like he has in Belarus. It is probably the number 1 goal here.

[dbt1949]

I say give it a couple of weeks and we'll see.

[Little Raven]

What are actual sanctions that WILL hurt? I’ve no idea and am curious.

Real sanctions means going after the oligarchs. It would mean seizing their Vancouver townhouses, tracking down their Caribbean accounts, kicking their kids out of Western universities. It would be VERY painful - London is practically an offshore bank depot for Russian money these days. And Russian money gets tangled up with Western money very quickly, so I suspect a lot of powerful figures in the West would get distinctly unhappy if we actually went down this road. It's not impossible...but I haven't seen any indication that Biden has the will to press for anything like it.

How would military action shatter the EU, out of curiosity?

Because the EU is deeply divided on...well, a lot of things, actually, but especially on the question of Russia.

Some EU countries, like Poland and Lithuania, consider Russian aggression to be a existential threat. They do not believe Putin can be appeased, and maintain that he must be checked - by force if necessary. Other countries, like Austria and Germany, are willing to give Putin damn near whatever he wants so long as he doesn't cut off their energy supply. (Germany recently had to sack a Navy Chief for publicly saying that Putin is right to take Ukraine.) The rest of Europe falls somewhere in-between. Even applying sanctions will serve as a crowbar in these existing fault lines, widening the gulf between various EU countries on policy, but actual military action would be downright seismic. Mind you, I agree with Mal that military action is all but unthinkable, but if it were to occur, it's not hard to imagine Germany basically standing aside while American and Polish forces support Ukraine - and that would be deeply damaging, if not outright fatal, to the EU experiment. You can't be a unified continent but not move in unison against outside aggression.

But given all this, what is our best option (even if it's not >50% likely to succeed) to prevent Putin from successful regime change in Ukraine? Is funding a sustained anti-Russia insurgency feasible?

Uh....hope Putin has a stroke?

Not everything is within our power to change. Ukraine is on the other side of the world from us, and it's right next to Russia. Something like 20% of the citizens of Ukraine are ethnically Russian, and a not insignificant portion of the population is probably more sympathetic to Moscow than they are to Kiev. At the end of the day, if Putin wants it bad enough, we can't really stop him without catastrophic risk. We can ship "lethal aid," try to make taking it as painful as possible. We can (maybe) impose sanctions, assuming we can get Europe to play along. But it will ultimately be Putin's call to make.

[Isgrimnur]

As of the 2010 U.S. Census, Hispanics and Latinos of any race were 38.2% of Texas's population.

[xwraith]

Meanwhile in Belarus….



And at sea…

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

[xwraith]

UK getting ready in case of need to evacuate nationals from Ukraine

Spoiler:

[Grifman]

We can (maybe) impose sanctions, assuming we can get Europe to play along. But it will ultimately be Putin's call to make.

There is one set of painful sanctions that we can impose without European approval. The US can ban the export of semi-conductors made with US technology(regardless of the company using those tools/software). Most semi-conductors are not made in the US, but almost all of the tools and software and know how is US made. The US did this against Huawei and this severely hurt them - they were second largest cell phone manufacturer before the sanctions, now they aren't in the top 5. The year before the sanctions, revenue grew 19%, afterwards growth fell to 4%. Sanctioning Russia in this manner would prevent their import of these items. This would severely hurt Russia's military, and if applied to consumer goods would impact the import of items like cell phones, PC's, etc. They could get some of this from China (who would ignore it) but probably not enough to offset much of the pain.