Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What are Ukraine's military options for regaining the Crimea?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What are Ukraine's military options for regaining the Crimea?

    Is some kind of war of attrition possible, such that Ukraine can inflict thousands of KIA on the Russian force while taking larger casualties, with the result that the Russians get tired of the human costs and the monetary expense and leave? In other words, something like Iraq or Afghanistan vis-a-vis US forces? Offhand, it appears that being a peninsula attached to the rest of Ukraine by a sliver of land, the Crimea doesn't actually give the Ukrainian military any way to mount hit-and-run attacks, given that this land route is easily blocked and the waters around the Crimea are controlled by the Russian Navy.

  • #2
    None if the Ukraines don't want to see every single one of their cities in flames.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
      None if the Ukraines don't want to see every single one of their cities in flames.
      Wouldn't that be considered a war crime? Nonetheless, assuming that Ukrainians are willing to put up with Russian bombs, what options do they have, if any?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
        Wouldn't that be considered a war crime?
        How? We bombed Belgrade, Baghdad, Kabul.

        Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
        Nonetheless, assuming that Ukrainians are willing to put up with Russian bombs, what options do they have, if any?
        The Ukraines will lose the conventional war hands down. The question is can an insurrection succeed? The problem is that there is a significant local populace who supports the Russians. In other words, it would turn into a bloody civil war with the outcome pretty much the way it is now, with Russia in control of the Crimea. The locals will in win in their local area.

        Comment


        • #5
          Did not Ukraine, when returning nuclear weapons and other military assets to Russia, sign an agreement where Russia, the United States and the UK guaranteed Ukraine's territorial integrity? Russia claimed it was acting to protect Russian speaking peoples, but did it acknowledge that it was doing so in spite of the border guarantee? What legal responsibilities do the other signatories of the treaty bear in the event of it being broken? I'm not asking what we can or have the capability to do, just what we might be required to do from the stand point of signatory.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
            How? We bombed Belgrade, Baghdad, Kabul.

            The Ukraines will lose the conventional war hands down. The question is can an insurrection succeed? The problem is that there is a significant local populace who supports the Russians. In other words, it would turn into a bloody civil war with the outcome pretty much the way it is now, with Russia in control of the Crimea. The locals will in win in their local area.
            What would you consider to be the critical differences between the American experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the potential Russian experience in Ukraine that would lead to a different outcome for the Russians?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
              What would you consider to be the critical differences between the American experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the potential Russian experience in Ukraine that would lead to a different outcome for the Russians?
              The Russians have local support and live next door. The Crimeans don't want their land to turn into a hell hole and the only ones who would be up for a dragged out insurgency are the tar tar who are like 16 percent of the population.

              Comment


              • #8
                The situation in the countries you mentioned was already highly volatile. There were a lot of different ethnicitis hating each other and competing for power. The situation was only kept calm by a strong authoritarian government. The Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Consequently you had a lot of people trained in protracted guerilla confrontations. So after the government was gone civil war between this factions broke out, mainly because of inter ethnic strifes that were mostly completely unrelated to the US-invasion. In Afghanistan it's been the Taliban and its affiliates, all military organizations specialized in Guerilla warfare with the advantage of being able to mount cross border attacks on allied troops.
                In Iraq you had (and still have) a precarious power balance between Sunnites and Shiites, two islamic groups that mortally hate each other. With Hussein gone, an open Power struggle broke out and radical groups like Al Qaeda tried to capitalize on that.

                In Ukraine, the situation is a little different. In Crimea you do have a division between Russian-rooted people, and pro European Ukrainians plus the Tartarian minority. But up until now they peacefully coexisted under a comparably democratic government, so I think there's no way you can compare that division to the ones that have wrecked the Middle East for the recent decades. Additionally most of the Ukrainians are ordinary citizens, who don't have an idea of insurgencies. This is completely different in the Middle East, where the volatility and inter ethnic hatred invites the creation of armed militias.

                Consequently I also do not believe in a protracted struggle. If Russia absorbs Crimea, we will have some Ukrainian and International protests and then the situation will calm down.
                I've been covering this issue on my Blog, so if you are interested, feel free to have a look here:
                Last edited by TopHatter; 11 Mar 14,, 01:00. Reason: Suppose you advertise someplace else please?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                  Is some kind of war of attrition possible, such that Ukraine can inflict thousands of KIA on the Russian force while taking larger casualties, with the result that the Russians get tired of the human costs and the monetary expense and leave? In other words, something like Iraq or Afghanistan vis-a-vis US forces? Offhand, it appears that being a peninsula attached to the rest of Ukraine by a sliver of land, the Crimea doesn't actually give the Ukrainian military any way to mount hit-and-run attacks, given that this land route is easily blocked and the waters around the Crimea are controlled by the Russian Navy.
                  The US have, for a long time now, had a policy of containment for Communist activity in Europe. The problem is that this will just turn into another Bosnia. It's been a while in the making, but what is happening here was almost inevitable. The Pro-Russian and Pro-Europe populaces will never integrate well. So it's not really a Community expansionism issue, it's a load of Russians who for some unfathomable reason want to eek back to the 'good old days' and join up with the great bear once again.

                  It's best we just all stay well away from it. Best that Ukraine give Crimea to whoever wants it and re-draw the border. Crimea may be a handy strategic outpost, but it's not much use with Russians all over it. As soon as the poop hits the fan and it's strategic advantages actually become useful the politics would disallow its use.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DonBelt View Post
                    Did not Ukraine, when returning nuclear weapons and other military assets to Russia, sign an agreement where Russia, the United States and the UK guaranteed Ukraine's territorial integrity? Russia claimed it was acting to protect Russian speaking peoples, but did it acknowledge that it was doing so in spite of the border guarantee? What legal responsibilities do the other signatories of the treaty bear in the event of it being broken? I'm not asking what we can or have the capability to do, just what we might be required to do from the stand point of signatory.
                    None. It's not a defence pact and no obligation of military or even economic intervention to safeguard Ukrainian borders

                    Ukraine. Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikisource, the free online library

                    Originally posted by Mithridates View Post
                    What would you consider to be the critical differences between the American experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the potential Russian experience in Ukraine that would lead to a different outcome for the Russians?
                    Looking at the wrong place. Moscow has no qualms about bleeding for what is theirs. They tried letting Chechnya go and it came back to haunt them at Beslan. They're not ones to repeat their mistakes.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      >Consequently I also do not believe in a protracted struggle. If Russia absorbs Crimea, we will have some Ukrainian and International protests and then the situation will calm down.

                      Indeed, what would the struggle be over? A land full of people who really don't like the direction Kiev is going in and would really much rather forge closer ties with Russia. You are right to point out that they lived together fairly well for some time, but that was before the sudden switch to a very pro Russian stance. I guess the ethic Ukrainians wee never going to let that happen. There are lots of jobs to be had in Europe for them and Poland is about full of Ukrainians now.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think attempting to fight a war of attrition against Russia is patently retarded. Even more so when you don't have the tech or training advantage to attrit them faster than they can to you.

                        Your literally attempting to fight them head on at their greatest strength.
                        The best part of repentance is the sin

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          SebastianKirsch Reply

                          Introduce yourself, please, before gifting the rest of us from your cyber soapbox with those valued insights and convenient blog link.

                          You're rude.

                          Hope that quickly changes.
                          "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
                          "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Like most ex-soviet states the population has the training and some equipment but not the resources. Despite everything a war is not desired by anyone. All the Ukraine can do is block any further russian attempts into their territory. Some "people" are willing to fight but it depends in the government's liquidity which is as good as zero.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The Ukrainian military is supposedly in the midst of a general mobilization. Would anyone care to guess the minimum amount of time needed for a low-readiness, low-budget military like Ukraine's to get into some semblance of fighting shape, such that the troops are somewhat more than untrained rabble?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X