Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
The Russian Army will probably act as a break to any such plan.As for covert action,it's unlikely they can do as good as in Ukraine.And right,they aren't doing good at all in Ukraine.
Any violent uprising in a NATO country will be destroyed within days with nothing to show for the effort.
Had Ukraine been a victory for them,we expected them to come for Moldova and the Black Sea.
The problem is that Putin et co did not backed of when they had the perfect pretext in the eyes of the international community.But they no longer care for that.They only care about the internal front.Right now,they ride a popularity wave.In time and with sanctions that will erode.A great war for Ukraine has enormous risks for Russia,but losing the limited war there also poses huge risks in the medium and long term.Having failed the blitz insurgency,the Russians have no good(or at least safe) cards.
The risk for a war is greater now than it was in March.However,for them to win such a war,they need to mobilize.For the Russians,it's easy to create pretexts.After all,Finnish imperialists decided for some reason to threaten Leningrad in 1939.
Indeed, I was thinking the same thing last night, that Putin is facing a Morton's Fork. Both options are very unsavory.
1) He can let the rebels lose, which he'll face all sorts of discontent. And thanks to MH 17 and the Crimean mess, the sanctions will stay in place for the most part, so Putin will be under attack from two fronts; the nationalists and the oligarchs. Any post Putin government in this situation, if the nationalists play any role in it, will be extraordinarily hostile to NATO for a very, very long time.
2) Or Putin can go in and outright invade Ukraine. Sure, he could try for a 'limited' war involving just Donetsk and Luhansk. But that's extraordinarily optimistic, given Kiev's mobilization of reserves, Russia is going to be in for a very long hybrid war of attrition. Expanding the invasion to Kharkiv and westwards only increase the bloodbath (patriotic Ukrainians of all ethnicities in that case, whether Ukrainian, Russian, Tartar, Jew, Pole or German, would seek to take the fight to the Rodina itself, think Chechnya times twenty five).
In this situation Putin will still face crushing sanctions that destroy the Russian middle class, and a military catastrophe. Now, to reduce the military burden (and demoralize the Ukrainians in the bargain), Moscow could cook up a pretext to invade the Baltic States and hope that the Russian Army stays on there long enough for NATO to crack and give up, especially if the SVR and GRU can use various hired/opportunistic NeoNazi and leftover Stalinist fifth columnists in Europe to stir up serious unrest. After NATO gives up, Putin can dictate some sort of settlement that removes the sanctions. Now this probably only has a 10-20% chance of working, at the absurdly best case scenario.
The danger is this Morton's Fork that I've outlined is that given Putin faces near certain domestic implosion regardless of whether the rebels lose or he invades. So, if he has to deal with an imploded economy and social tumult in Russia (whether domestic or Ukrainian partisans) regardless, the 10-20% chance of success by invading a Baltic Country looks like a potential roll of dice...
Putin doesn't have a history of gambling problems, does he?
Last edited by Skywatcher; 29 Jul 14,, 19:52.
Reason: Typo
The majority of Russians consider all Black Sea coast handed over to Ukraine by communists unjustified and wrong. Sort of revanchism.
Not sort of revanchism, it is revanchism. Russia's hostile annexation of Crimea (stealing) is illegal and is considered illegitimate by the vast majority of countries in the United Nations.
For all of my life and well before, Crimea was Ukrainian. I have a residence there. And now? The thieves in Moscow designate me a foreigner in my own land.
Indeed, I was thinking the same thing last night, that Putin is facing a Morton's Fork. Both options are very unsavory.
....
Putin doesn't have a history of gambling problems, does he?
Was thinking that IF the Russians intend to invade,MH17 is a great maskirovka.Regardless if the shooting was deliberate or accidental.It fvcked the collective brains of the West.And if what our friend Mr S says is true(and in the matters regarding the Russian state of mind I believe him) it hyped the Russian souls.Motherland under attack by Westerners for no reason,etc...
No,Volodea doesn't have a history of gambling.He has one of brilliance.But everyoane has fvck-ups.Napoleon had Essling before Wagram.Putin may have the failing insurgency in Ukraine before...
Those who know don't speak
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36
Within the past week, the Western calculus regarding Russia has apparently undergone a sea-change. MH17 was an eye opener for European nations on the sanctions fence. Evidence is accumulating that Russia has increased weapons transfers to its proxy forces in eastern Ukraine and is directly aiding those forces with cross-border artillery and GRAD launchers working in tandem with drone targeting.
The European Union today imposed tougher sanctions against the Russian energy, finance, and arms sectors. The United States and Canada will follow suit tomorrow. For the first time since Crimea, the West appears to be coalescing on the same page.
.But everyoane has fvck-ups.Napoleon had Essling before Wagram.Putin may have the failing insurgency in Ukraine before...
If his choice now is between losing and invading, and he doesn't want to invade, the question for him is, how does he come away looking like a winner. There's Crimea, of course. As for his ending his campaign in the east, he has possibilities. He has to recognize in his own mind that a change in the Ukr constitution to allow local elections and choice of governor leaves him with some political influence in the east. He can claim he influenced that change, along with other measures favorable to Russian-speakers in the region. It is not what Russians have been hyped up to expect by Putin's media blitz since all this began, but he can manage it with his media machine. To do this he needs to act first and soon before the rebels totally collapse.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
You have a very selective memory. DO you know what that means? It means you choose to select only memories that suit your particular point of view. Have you forgotten that Russia invaded Crimea before the change in the Ukrainian government that has been recognized almost everywhere except Russia.?
How's that?
Yanukovich was overthrown on February 23.
Crimean Supreme Council stated to hold the referendum on the status of Crimea on February 27.
The referendum was held on March 16.
Am I wrong or February 23 is before February 27 and March 16?
Well, well, well... Do you feel the smell of betraying here? Ukrainians are "so-called good guys" now. What does that mean?
Keep things in perspective. This is a reporter talking. The fact that US intelligence is revealing this is significant, if true. Barbara Starr is a pretty good defense reporter, but Costello, the anchor, is trying to stir up controversy, a typical CNN tactic to pull in watchers. We'll see where this goes.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Tweet
Too bad general Aleksandr Lebed was killed.
Comment