The Worldwide Response to Russia's War On Ukraine

[Albany Rifles]

Ukraine says it's working with BAE to set up weapons production facility

(Reuters) - Ukraine is working with major British defense company BAE Systems to set up a Ukrainian base to both produce and repair weapons from tanks to artillery, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Tuesday.

Zelenskiy spoke after talks with senior officials from BAE, including Chief Executive Charles Woodburn.

"It is indeed a massive manufacturer of weaponry, the kind of weaponry that we need now and will continue to need," Zelenskiy said in an evening video address.

"We are working on establishing a suitable base in Ukraine for production and repair. This encompasses a wide range of weaponry, from tanks to artillery," he added. Zelenskiy did not give further details.

Earlier in the day, Zelenskiy said the two sides had agreed to start work on opening a BAE office in Ukraine.
_______

Niiiiice....

BAE is a great ground combat vehicle producer. Good reliabilty

[TopHatter]

Macron tells Eastern Europe - we should have listened to you over Russia

PARIS (Reuters) - President Emmanuel Macron acknowledged on Wednesday that France should have paid more attention to Eastern European nations, which warned about a belligerent Russia before Moscow's forces invaded Ukraine.

Macron told a security forum there should be no division between "Old Europe" and "New Europe", referring to enduring divergences between eastern and western European Union members over matters such as Russia.

"Some said you had missed an opportunity to shut up. I think we also lost an opportunity to listen to you. This time is over," Macron said to applause during a speech at the GLOBSEC think tank in the Slovak capital, Bratislava.

He was alluding to a remark in 2003 by then-French President Jacques Chirac, who said east European nations who sided with the United States and Britain in their decision to invade Iraq that year, opposed by some major western allies including France and Germany, had missed a "good opportunity to shut up".

The remark shocked east European countries and contributed to an enduring mistrust of Paris by EU's newest members that has re-emerged since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

In the aftermath of the invasion, eastern EU countries such as Poland criticised Macron for keeping communication channels open with Russian President Vladimir Putin, or for saying that Russia should not be "humiliated" in the course of international efforts to end the Ukraine conflict.

On Wednesday, Macron also said Europe should build up its own defence industry and not only rely on the United States for protection, though he acknowledged the U.S. contribution in money and materiel had been crucial to forming a credible front against Russia.

"Let's be grateful and say thank you to the United States. But is this administration here forever?" Macron said. "That's why a European defence pillar in NATO is indispensable."

The United States has presidential elections in November, 2024 with Donald Trump - who as president said European nations should pay more for their own defence - likely to run again.

Macron said Russia had suffered clear setbacks in the war, including Finland's accession to NATO and losing legitimacy on the global stage.

"War is far from over but one thing is clear: Ukraine won't be conquered. We can see that what was supposed to be a 'special operation' is already a geopolitical failure," Macron said.
__________

Yeah better late than never....

Wasn't it Mitt Romney that identified Russia as the most potent threat to the United States...over 10 years ago?

[Bigfella]

Nukes aside I'm not sure Russia has been the most potent threat to the US for a while. Europe, on the other hand.....

But yes, nice for France to finally get the memo. Sadly if the fascist scum running for President next election wins it will all be for naught.

[S2]

Pete,

Russia is, however, that nation most immediately and openly challenging our values. The outcome of this challenge will, to a great extent, shape further, greater challenges with the PRC. As a consequence, this challenge must be decisively defeated.

Feel free to choose, "...in a humiliating fashion...". I do such that the PRC might consider the adverse consequences of military adventurism.

[Bigfella]

Pete,

Russia is, however, that nation most immediately and openly challenging our values. The outcome of this challenge will, to a great extent, shape further, greater challenges with the PRC. As a consequence, this challenge must be decisively defeated.

Feel free to choose, "...in a humiliating fashion...". I do such that the PRC might consider the adverse consequences of military adventurism.

No argument there mate. Russia is the nation causing the biggest issues and is the one that needs to be dealt with decisively. To an extent I'd use the current clusterfuck as an example of why the PRC is ultimately a bigger threat - I'm not sure Xi would be capable of doing something this dumb and self-defeating if you repeatedly hit him over the head.

But yes, humiliating Russia MAY cause China to seriously re-think the potential consequences of trying to attain major national goals via war. The pessimist in me worries that it might just show China a bunch of potential issues, big and small, that it needs to attend to before starting anything. However, that process will give time to the US & it allies to address their own issues, which I'm inclined to believe still leaves the balance tilted in our favour, if not as heavily as it is with Russia.

I'm sure we can also agree that a rare (and possibly temporary) moment of clarity on the part of France is to be welcomed, if not relied upon. :)

[Goatboy]

Nukes aside.
.

That sounds a bit like "except for the grizzly bear's enormous teeth and claws Russia is no threat.

[Monash]

That sounds a bit like "except for the grizzly bear's enormous teeth and claws Russia is no threat.

Possibly. But that analogy ignores the fact that the other side also has "enormous teeth and claws" or if you prefer a high powered hunting rifle zeroed in on the 'bears' centre of mass! Which of course makes the other 'bear' equally dangerous. So that makes it another no win situation for Putin. Which, so far at least is also how the war in Ukraine is panning out for Russia,

[Bigfella]

That sounds a bit like "except for the grizzly bear's enormous teeth and claws Russia is no threat.

Not 'no threat', but less than China. Given that both sides have similar numbers, which severely limits the likelihood of use. I tend to see calculations of 'threat' in terms of things that are likely to happen - conventional military & economic. China is well ahead on both.

[Officer of Engineers]

Not 'no threat', but less than China. Given that both sides have similar numbers, which severely limits the likelihood of use. I tend to see calculations of 'threat' in terms of things that are likely to happen - conventional military & economic. China is well ahead on both.

Pete,

I may be not following you but Russia's nuclear arsenal dwarfs China. The largest estimate of the Chinese nuclear arsenal is 550 warheads (based on IAEA verified accounting of Chinese fissile materials) while Russia's nukes is around 6000. The Russian nuclear threat definitely dwarfs China's.

[Bigfella]

Pete,

I may be not following you but Russia's nuclear arsenal dwarfs China. The largest estimate of the Chinese nuclear arsenal is 550 warheads (based on IAEA verified accounting of Chinese fissile materials) while Russia's nukes is around 6000. The Russian nuclear threat definitely dwarfs China's.

Absolutely no disagreement Sir. The Russian nuclear threat is by far the largest. While that threat is real, the chances of it being used are extremely low.

My point was more along the lines that in the areas where nations are willing to use their power - especially conventional military & economic - China is more dangerous than Russia to US interests.

[kato]

Germany is poised to order 18 Leopard 2 main battle tanks to replace units sent to Ukraine with an option for 105 more at a total cost of around €2.9 billion ($3.2 billion), according to people familiar with the plan.
[...]
The contract for the Pumas includes an option for 61 additional units, taking the total ordered to 111, the people said.

The framework contract for Puma is for 229 units, not 111. The "61 additional units" is what some defence press claims is needed based on announcements of the Army of needing 111 additional Puma. The full contract agreed upon is if the full number of Puma based on older long-term plans is procured - basically they secured the option to fall back to those older, more extensive plans if required. The framework contract has a fixed-price option for call-up of up to the additional 179 (beyond the 50 ordered) if exercised before February 2024.

The framework contract for Leopard 2 at 123 units (as in the article) is - besides the 18 ordered as replacment for units given to Ukraine - for up to 105 units to be government-contracted and resold to interested export partners. First country interested in those is the Czech Republic for up to 70, btw. The contract price, including the fixed 18-unit order for the Bundeswehr, is 526 million Euro, but includes both the fixed-price option, extensive spare parts packages for the rest of the fleet and a five-year maintenance contract.

[tbm3fan]

The framework contract for Puma is for 229 units, not 111. The "61 additional units" is what some defence press claims is needed based on announcements of the Army of needing 111 additional Puma. The full contract agreed upon is if the full number of Puma based on older long-term plans is procured - basically they secured the option to fall back to those older, more extensive plans if required. The framework contract has a fixed-price option for call-up of up to the additional 179 (beyond the 50 ordered) if exercised before February 2024.

The framework contract for Leopard 2 at 123 units (as in the article) is - besides the 18 ordered as replacment for units given to Ukraine - for up to 105 units to be government-contracted and resold to interested export partners. First country interested in those is the Czech Republic for up to 70, btw. The contract price, including the fixed 18-unit order for the Bundeswehr, is 526 million Euro, but includes both the fixed-price option, extensive spare parts packages for the rest of the fleet and a five-year maintenance contract.

So Kato what do you think about Leopard 1 vs Leopard 2 here?

[kato]

Leopard 2 were sent ahead of Leopard 1 because the Leopard 2 could be taken from active combat troops in Europe. The Leopard 1 have to be refurbished - in some cases from a near-scrapmetal state - and the numbers announced will take nearly a year to be fully delivered.


The "combat engineer" quoted throughout the video is this guy who supposedly served in an Ukrainian volunteer force for 11 months. He regularly complains that certain items - in particular MBTs and combat aircraft - are being prioritized over actually more required equipment in particular for electronic warfare. Note: His Twitter feed/account seems to at least partially be laid out to generate donations for his unit.

[Bigfella]

I fear this will not end well. After sustained lobbying Australia has agreed to supply an undisclosed number of Hawkei 4WD vehicles (a bit like a Humvee) to Ukraine. Problem is the vehicles not only aren't ready to deploy due to a braking issue, but there are BIG logistics issues.

The Australian Army has raised serial objections to supplying the Hawkei. It first said its brakes were faulty. Next it said that so many spare parts would need to be supplied to Ukraine that the whole fleet would be unusable.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fede...05-p5de5a.html

Normally I'd see this as the Army or Defence Department BSing because it doesn't want to do something. However, I have it on VERY good authority that this is actually true. The parts issue is a particular problem, as it was suggested to me that if one of these breaks down it will be very difficult to get working again. That is why virtually all of these are sitting in depots rather than with units.

Hopefully no one dies as a result of this. I feel like there were more useful things we could have sent. I think we still have a bunch of M113s. Oh well, politics is politics. :(

[TopHatter]

Biden praises Denmark for 'standing up' for Ukraine in war with Russia


President Joe Biden meets with Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Monday, June 5, 2023

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden thanked Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Monday for Denmark's role in a Western alliance “standing up" for Ukraine as it tries to fend off Russia’s 15-month-old invasion.

The Oval Office visit was the first of a pair of critical meetings Biden is holding with European allies this week that will focus heavily on what lies ahead in the war in Ukraine — including the recently launched effort to train, and eventually equip, Ukraine with American-made F-16s fighter jets. Biden will meet Thursday with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

Both Britain and Denmark are playing a pivotal role in the nascent joint international plan that Biden recently endorsed after months of resisting calls from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for U.S. aircraft.

“There's a shared commitment to the core values and that gives us our strength — at least that's what I believe,” Biden said. “Together we're working to protect those values — including standing up for the people of Ukraine against the brutal aggression of the Russians.”

Biden's separate meetings with the leaders of two key NATO allies come at a crucial period in the 15-month war as Ukraine readies to launch a counteroffensive. It's also a moment when the U.S. and Europe are looking to demonstrate to Moscow that the Western-alliance remains strong and focused on cementing a longer-term commitment to Ukraine with no end to the conflict in sight.

Neither mentioned the F-16 agreement in their brief remarks before reporters at the start of the meeting, but the White House in a statement following the talks noted Denmark's “significant security assistance to Ukraine and its leadership in training Ukrainian pilots."

Frederiksen for her part thanked Biden for leading the transatlantic alliance.

“I am looking forward to working even closer with you on defense and security," she said.

Denmark has purchased dozens of American-made F-16s since the 1970s and has indicated it is open to the possibility of providing Ukraine with some. Britain strongly advocated for a coalition to supply Ukraine with fighter planes, and says it will support Ukraine getting the F-16s it wants. But the U.K. does not have any F-16s, and has ruled out sending Royal Air Force Typhoon jets.

Instead, Britain says it will give Ukrainian pilots basic training on Western-standard jets starting in early summer to prepare them to fly F-16s. The Ukrainian pilots will then go on to other countries for the next stages of training.

The F-16 agreement is among several recent high-profile efforts by the U.S. and Europe focused on bolstering Western resolve as the war grinds on. Moscow officials claimed that Ukrainian forces were making a major effort to punch through Russian defensive lines in southeast Ukraine for a second day Monday. Kyiv authorities didn’t confirm the attacks and suggested the claim was a Russian misinformation ruse.

Asked by a reporter during his Oval Office meeting with Frederiksen whether he believed the Ukrainians would be successful in their counteroffensive, Biden said nothing but raised his hand and crossed his fingers.

Last week, Frederiksen and Sunak were among 45 European leaders who traveled to Moldova for the first summit of the European Political Community where they underscored support for Eastern Europe's ambitions to draw closer to the West and keep Moscow at bay.

Biden was also expected to discuss with Frederiksen and Rishi preparations for next month's NATO summit in Lithuania that comes amid growing pressure on the alliance from Zelenskyy on NATO to offer Ukraine concrete security guarantees and a defined path for Kyiv to eventually win membership into the group.

The 31-member alliance is also looking at boosting Ukraine’s non-member status in NATO and preparing a framework for security commitments that it can offer once the war with Russia is over.

Max Bergmann, a former senior State Department official during the Obama administration, said Biden and his European counterparts' task is to stay on the same page for what comes after Ukraine's much-anticipated counteroffensive.

“Throughout this conflict, we have not only underestimated the Ukrainians but we have also underestimated the Europeans,” said Bergmann, who is now director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “They're not wavering but they will also need to keep finding new funds to plow into military equipment to support the Ukrainians. There’s a question on both sides of the Atlantic: How much will it actually take to sustain Ukraine?”

Following the meeting, Frederiksen suggested in an exchange with reporters that she had dim hopes of an endgame to the conflict in the near term.

“It takes two to tango,” she said. “So we need some signals from Russia and I don’t think any of us in the alliance are willing to do anything without Ukraine. So it starts with them — what Ukraine wants out of this.”

Denmark’s centrist government said last week that it would look to invest some 143 billion kroner ($20.6 billion) in the country’s defense over the next decade, citing a “serious threat picture.” The government has an ambition to reach NATO’s target of spending 2% of gross domestic product on military budgets by 2030, in part as a response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The spending plan was announced as Frederiksen has emerged as a possible contender to succeed NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg when his term ends in September. Asked whether she spoke to Biden about the expected vacancy, Frederiksen said she did not want to go “further in these speculations about NATO.”
___

Tak Danmark!