Kiev Burning

[Cerebus]

NYT: Russia Demands U.S. Stop Ukraine's Military Operation

MOSCOW — Russia on Thursday demanded that the United States force the Ukrainian authorities to halt a military operation in southeastern Ukraine and withdraw units of the armed forces.

---

"Washington must force the current Ukrainian leadership to immediately stop the military operation in southeastern Ukraine and withdraw military units to their permanent bases."

[UNT90]

So we will see a return to the Cold War with a dictator in place instead of a committee.

And we sit idly by on the sideline and let it happen?

Edited April 24, 2014 by UNT90

[Cerebus]

And we sit idly by on the sideline and let it happen?

Go ahead and tell me what we do to prevent it.

It's done. Hopefully EU and US will work together to reduce Putin's energy trump card.

[UNT90]

Go ahead and tell me what we do to prevent it.

It's done. Hopefully EU and US will work together to reduce Putin's energy trump card.

Detailed earlier. Of course you would need our allies in Europe cooperation.

Do you honestly think Putin stops there? Don't you think this will embolden him further? Do you really think HE wants the Cold War status quo? Or does he want more?

Embolden him now, and the world could pay a steep price in the future.

I don't think the answer is to throw our hands up and say "Oh well."

[CMJ]

Detailed earlier. Of course you would need our allies in Europe cooperation.

Do you honestly think Putin stops there? Don't you think this will embolden him further? Do you really think HE wants the Cold War status quo? Or does he want more?

Embolden him now, and the world could pay a steep price in the future.

I don't think the answer is to throw our hands up and say "Oh well."

[adman]

Cerebus mentioned earlier that journalist Simon Ostrovosky had been released. Following is a video of him in early March detailing what has been happening in Ukraine. Dozens and dozens of these on VICE.com.

Edited April 25, 2014 by adman

[UNT90]

CBS reports this morning that "unnamed US government source" reports that the US Intelligence community does not believe the Russians are preparing for an Invasion.

Lol! Seriously??

Obviously a dishonest leak from a political official to try and keep American minds off this issue.

[HoustonEagle]

Yes, Putin is waiting for the pot to come to full boil so that he can say he is "forced" to send troops to calm the situation.

Let's assume these points as axiomatic:

• The EU, NATO, and the US will not use force counter Russian aggression in non-NATO countries.
• The EU will not consider major sanctions for the annexation of any part of non NATO countries because of reliance on Russian Oil and Gas.
• Without EU support, US sanctions CAN NOT be hard enough to force policy change in Moscow.

What we are left with is a situation where Putin is going to take as much of the former (non NATO) USSR back as he wants. He will either do that by economic pressure and backing local elites, like in Belarus, or he will use force when needed (Georgia, Crimea, soon the Eastern Ukraine and the breakaway province of Moldova.)

I want everyone to consider this a fait accompli. I know this isn't popular, but the real world is the real world and this is what is going to happen. Putin has been able to position the EU in such a way that they can not risk losing Russian O&G. Russia's O&G is a fungible commodity. There is nothing the US can do on it's own. If we placed a ban on working with Russian O&G, the commodity would find another market. If we placed a ban on capital moving to Russia, the Chinese would step in. Before you bash Obama understand he is in the same position Bush was during the Georgia operations.

So what can we do now? Is it hopeless? No. One of two things must happen:

• The EU must be so outraged by Russian action that they are willing to throw their own economies under the bus for 2 to 3 years while then ween themselves off of R O&G. I don't see that as likely.
• The US and EU must work together to bring American O&G to EU markets, and to jump start development of EU O&G resources, which do exist, but which have not been worked because of environmental concerns. This is the course of action.

Look, leave the environmental concerns to another thread, the present day geopolitical reality is that the dependence on Russian O&G is a major hamstring to the expansion and development of western style democracy in eastern Europe. Only by moving those countries to a more western worldview will we be able to curtail Russian influence in the region.

On a more global scale, there are dozens of countries who have the ability to develop into democracies within the next few decades. Many of them are in Africa and Asia. If they see the triumph of democracy in Eastern Europe, they will be emboldened to follow the same path.

That is the real gambit. Demographically, Russia is boned. They are on the brink of a steep downturn. In 30 years they will no longer be within super power contention, that contest will between the US/India/China . However, if they stunt the growth of democracies, that will be a major blow.

I really enjoyed your post but it was your use of "axiomatic" that pushes it over the top. The only thing I would take slight issue with is the over-simplification concerning EU O&G resources. North Sea production is currently in decline, like much of the aging mega-fields around the world. Additional investment there will slow or stop declines but that is multi-year process that is already underway. Still that will not move the needle. The EU no doubt has potential to increase it's production through shale but attempts to unlock their resources, up to this point, have frustrated E&P companies. Still if you put that aside and every EU nation greatly reduced environmental regulations on the drillers you still have a challenge that will take a decade or more to overcome. Infrastructure. Often overlooked the US already had a massive network of gathering, processing and pipeline facilities in place from a centuries worth of E & P. Even with that advantage it has taken us a decade of massive investment to stop declines and increase production. (we still import over 40% of our oil) Most EU countries don't have near the infrastructure in place on a relative basis and it would take well over a decade in my estimation to actually bring enough oil and gas online to move the needle. One can look at the rig count numbers as a simple indicator of the daunting challenge it will be to bring more EU oil and gas online. Compare the number of US rigs to Europe. Then remember that we can not just move rigs to the EU , they must be built otherwise you are robbing Peter to pay Paul. Manufacturing all the additional rigs needed would take several years and that is still a far simpler problem to overcome than all the gathering and processing infrastructure that needs to be built-out. In summary Russia has Europe by the short hairs.

Worldwide Rotary Rig Count Change Percent Change January 2014 December 2013 January 2013 Monthly Annual Monthly Annual Latin America 401 417 414 (16) (13) -3.8% -3.1% Europe 126 126 134 0 (8) 0.0% -6.0% Africa 139 138 115 1 24 0.7% 20.9% Middle East 403 405 379 (2) 24 -0.5% 6.3% Far East 256 249 237 7 19 2.8% 8.0% International 1,325 1,335 1,279 (10) 46 -0.7% 3.6% Canada 504 372 503 132 1 35.5% 0.2% United States 1,769 1,771 1,757 (2) 12 -0.1% 0.7% World 3,598 3,478 3,539 120 59 3.5% 1.7%

Edit: I apologize that was a total cut and paste fail on my part. You can find the data here:

http://www.wtrg.com/rotaryrigs.html#Monthly

Please keep your post coming as I truly enjoy your insight.

Edited April 26, 2014 by HoustonEagle

[Cerebus]

I really enjoyed your post but it was your use of "axiomatic" that pushes it over the top. The only thing I would take slight issue with is the over-simplification concerning EU O&G resources.

No doubt they can't rely 100% on themselves, but if they would begin work now, and if we would begin building LNG export facilities on the East Coast, then in about two years they could greatly reduce dependence on Russia. They can't shrug off Russian demands when the EU is dependent on Russia for 35-40% of their natural gas, and that is the main thing, NG for heating and for electricity production.

If that number is 5-10%, then things change.

[Cerebus]

The Economist: Ukraine's government - Faltering, but fully legit

Last weekend the Ukrainian newspaper Dzerkalo Tyzhnia published a large survey of more than 3,000 people in eight southern and eastern regions. Some of the results should comfort the country's leaders: only 15% of respondents want to unite with Russia. Even in Donetsk and Luhansk (the easternmost and most thoroughly Russian-speaking regions), the figure is less than a third. The poll debunks Russia's narrative of a desperate Russophone community in revolt against a nationalistic government in Kiev: some 77% oppose the armed separatists who have occupied public buildings in the region.

---

But while many southern and eastern Ukrainians may not support the separatists, neither do they support the government. Half of respondents consider the current, internationally recognised authorities to be illegitimate. In Donetsk and Luhansk, that figure rises to 70%.

[Cerebus]

U.S. Embassy Statement on Violence in Eastern Ukraine

The United States is disgusted by last night’s savage attack on the peaceful pro-unity demonstrators in Donetsk, including many women and children. This senseless violence is a reminder of the struggle for dignity that underlies the political debate in Ukraine today. We also condemn the separatists’ taking of hostages, both Ukrainians and international monitors, some of whom have been brutally beaten. There is no place for these examples of inhuman behavior in a modern, democratic society. This is terrorism, pure and simple. We support the Ukrainian Government’s efforts to contain this threat and defend the lives and safety of its citizens. In addition, we call on all who hold sway with these armed groups, including the Russian Federation, to arrange for an immediate cessation of all violent acts and the release of all hostages. This is a reminder of why the elections on May 25 will be so important to the future of this country. And in that the Ukrainian people will enjoy the full support of the United States.

[Cerebus]

REUTERS: Wounded Ukrainian mayor 'stable' in Israeli hospital

Gennady Kernes, one of Ukraine's most prominent Jewish politicians, was shot in the back on Monday in Kharkiv, and underwent surgery in Ukraine on Monday. Officials had said his injuries were life-threatening.

"He is stable. That is all we can say right now," a staff member at the hospital in Haifa, northern Israel, told Reuters.

[Cerebus]

John Kerry: U.S. Taped Moscow’s Calls to Its Ukraine Spies

“Intel is producing taped conversations of intelligence operatives taking their orders from Moscow and everybody can tell the difference in the accents, in the idioms, in the language. We know exactly who’s giving those orders, we know where they are coming from,” Kerry said at a private meeting of the Trilateral Commission in Washington.

---

“It’s not an accident that you have some of the same people identified who were in Crimea and in Georgia and who are now in east Ukraine,” said Kerry. “This is insulting to everybody’s intelligence, let alone to our notions about how we ought to be behaving in the 21st century. It’s thuggism, it’s rogue state-ism. It’s the worst order of behavior.”

Pretty damning evidence that Russia is fomenting all of this. Of course anyone who doesn't hum The Internationale in their spare time was probably already admitting this.

[H-towngreen]

REUTERS: Wounded Ukrainian mayor 'stable' in Israeli hospital

Good to hear as I heard he was killed.

[Cerebus]

BBC News: Russia condemns US 'Iron Curtain' sanctions

Mr Ryabkov told the online newspaper Gazeta.ru that the US sanctions were "a blow to our hi-tech enterprises and industries".

He added: "This is a revival of a system created in 1949 when Western countries essentially lowered an 'Iron Curtain', cutting off supplies of hi-tech goods to the USSR and other countries."

A Russian foreign ministry statement said the EU was "doing Washington's bidding with new unfriendly gestures towards Russia".

For you internet kids, let me translate:

[Cerebus]

Russia has been stating that it has moved most of its troops back to normal bases:

Kyiv Post: Shoigu: Russian troops back at permanent bases after drills near Ukraine border

Deutsche Welle: Russian troops deployed along Ukrainian border 'return to barracks'

However the people with drones and satellite images say this is not true.

NATO says it has no information indicating a withdrawal of Russian troops from the Ukrainian border #cbc

— Nahlah Ayed (@NahlahAyed)

April 29, 2014

^^^ Is it me, or is there not a twitter update above this? ^^^

Anyway here is a direct link.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Cerebus

[Cerebus]

This was stated a few days ago, but it seems like no one has picked up on it.

Russian UN Permanent Representative: Russia Has Legal Grounding to Enter Ukraine

The Russian ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin has announced that Russia has the international legal grounds for introducing peace-keepers into Ukraine in the event of necessity. Churkin told Interfax:

'There are relevant norms in the UN Charter, Art. 51 of the Charter, which speaks of self-defense, and which we, by the way, activated during the conflict in the Caucasus in 2008," he said on the air in the program 'Sunday Evening with Vladimir Solovyev.'

'So we have international legal grounds. There is the relevant decision of the Federation Council,' noted Churkin

Now let's look at Article 51:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

1) No idea how they could argue an armed attack has occurred against Russia.

2) He is right, this is the exact same BS reading they invoked in Georgia, and no one called them to task then.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Cerebus

[Cerebus]

NPR: Does Russia Have The Military To Take Ukraine?

Ruslan Pukhov, the director of CAST, says Russia's military had to modernize and understand it no longer had enough military-age people to field a giant army.

"We don't have enough people; that's why we [are] supposed to fight in another way," he says. "Now we understand, we [are] also supposed to care about the soldier, because there are not enough of them."
---
Russia put a big share of its oil wealth into defense spending, but at least one analyst says the country still doesn't have enough well-trained professional soldiers to carry out an invasion of Ukraine.

Russian conscripts serve only one year, meaning they spend much of their time in training, and are only combat-ready for about half of their stint in the military.

"That's why it's so important that we either move now, and order the conscripts to stay in units because of a war situation, or we don't move at all," says Pavel Felgenhauer, a defense analyst and columnist for the newspaper Novaya Gazeta.

Felgenhauer says half of the draftees are ready to be discharged, so unless Russia acts by the middle of May, the army won't be fully combat-ready again until sometime in August.

And that, he says, could give Ukraine the time it needs to bring its own outdated and demoralized military up to fighting strength, which would make it a much more dangerous opponent for Russia.

[H-towngreen]

NPR: Does Russia Have The Military To Take Ukraine?

I don't buy that one bit. They may be lacking but Ukraine on the other hand is severly lacking

[Cerebus]

Previously I had spoken of us having one airborne and one stryker BCT in EU. It's my understanding that those units are:

173rd Airbone Brigade

2nd Cav Regiment

In addition 1st Cav and 3rd Infantry are "regionally aligned" and would be the first to go if we sent large amounts of troops in.

Still, no armor.

I think the US would get a huge bang for the buck deal by shipping ten thousand AT4s to the Ukrainians. Carter sent the Stinger to the Mujaheddin and it tipped that war. Russian purposely sent millions of AK's to every single country who could possible be a thorn in our side for about 50 years.

[Cerebus]

CNBC: For Russia, negatives seem to outweigh positives of an invasion

Yet the reasons for Mr. Putin to refrain from further military adventurism make a longer, more tangled list: the cost of a huge occupation force and the responsibility for the welfare of millions more people; the effect of new, more severe Western sanctions on an already weak economy; the possibility of significant Russian casualties caused by an insurgency in eastern Ukraine; a new, implacably anti-Russian western section of Ukraine; and likely pariah status internationally.
---
"Military intervention from Putin's point of view is Plan B," Mark Galeotti, a New York University professor and expert on Russia's security forces currently doing research here, said recently. "It is not off the table, but it is not the ideal outcome."

Mr. Putin would rather feed the insurrection from afar, analysts said, never quite allowing the calm that would give Ukraine the opening needed to join the European Union, or worse, NATO. It is a tactic Russia has used successfully in previous attempts by former Soviet republics to shift westward.
---
Perhaps a more significant precedent, Professor Zubok said, are the high-profile military maneuvers, without an invasion, long recommended by the K.G.B. to destabilize restive neighbors. Russia deployed that tactic in Berlin in 1958, and in Poland during the 1980-81 Solidarity uprisings, for example. If Moscow is following that strategy now, no invasion is imminent, he said.
---
The economic fallout from Crimea has already shoved Russia toward recession, with capital flight and skittish foreign investors. Russia's credit rating was cut Friday by Standard & Poor's to just one notch above "junk" status, pushing up the cost of much-needed loans abroad.

I don't buy that one bit. They may be lacking but Ukraine on the other hand is severly lacking

From the above article:

Beyond economics, the specter of Slavs killing Slavs would soon sour the Russian public on any invasion. Although the Ukrainian Army is weak, it numbers 70,000, and the country has a history of partisans' attacking invaders. Mr. Korotchenko said Russians would probably embrace military intervention only if the army was dispatched as a peacekeeping force should the Ukrainian military cause mass casualties.

And the locals could also prove hostile. In eastern Ukraine, regional polls have found that at most one-third of the population, depending on the city, supports joining Russia.

In Crimea, Russian soldiers were greeted warmly, and needed to hold only the Isthmus of Perekop, three miles wide, to sever Crimea from Ukraine. In eastern Ukraine, if the 40,000 Russian troops now estimated to be camped along the border crossed over, they would probably be attacked. Russia would also be responsible for a flood of refugees.

"You cannot occupy this region only with these small green men," said Alexander M. Golts, an independent Russian military analyst, referring to the anonymous soldiers in Crimea whom Mr. Putin later admitted were elite Russian soldiers. "So you beat those poor Ukrainians. What then? You will have to establish a new border. You will not need 40,000 troops, you will need 140,000."

Maybe he learned from Iraq. An invasion != an occupation.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Cerebus

[UNT90]

And Putin will just order the conscripts to stay in the military until he says different. If they disobey, they and their families will suddenly be arrested for "crimes against the state."

They are not the USA, ya know. Different rules.

[Cerebus]

And Putin will just order the conscripts to stay in the military until he says different. If they disobey, they and their families will suddenly be arrested for "crimes against the state."

They are not the USA, ya know. Different rules.

And that argument addresses nothing here:

Beyond economics, the specter of Slavs killing Slavs would soon sour the Russian public on any invasion. Although the Ukrainian Army is weak, it numbers 70,000, and the country has a history of partisans' attacking invaders. Mr. Korotchenko said Russians would probably embrace military intervention only if the army was dispatched as a peacekeeping force should the Ukrainian military cause mass casualties.

And the locals could also prove hostile. In eastern Ukraine, regional polls have found that at most one-third of the population, depending on the city, supports joining Russia.

In Crimea, Russian soldiers were greeted warmly, and needed to hold only the Isthmus of Perekop, three miles wide, to sever Crimea from Ukraine. In eastern Ukraine, if the 40,000 Russian troops now estimated to be camped along the border crossed over, they would probably be attacked. Russia would also be responsible for a flood of refugees.

"You cannot occupy this region only with these small green men," said Alexander M. Golts, an independent Russian military analyst, referring to the anonymous soldiers in Crimea whom Mr. Putin later admitted were elite Russian soldiers. "So you beat those poor Ukrainians. What then? You will have to establish a new border. You will not need 40,000 troops, you will need 140,000."

I think what you see happening now is most likely the extent of Russian involvement. Primarily because it working out for them. They know they can coordinate what they have been doing and get what they want.

Why invade and bring about all those drawbacks?

1) Russia looks like they will be able to dominate the rest of the Ukraine with natural gas. It's no coincidence that Russia just changed their gas payment policy, to force prepayment, and that the change is going into effect a week before the Ukrainian elections.

2) The US's long term play is to get the EU off the Russian gas teat, and restart REFORGER.

[UNT90]

I doubt civilians with small arms are going to attempt to resist the Russian Army.

I also don't buy that the Russians won't invade. They may be waiting to see how the elections go as they no doubt will stuff the ballot box in Eastern Ukraine and may think that will be enough to get a Russian puppet elected. If that occurs, things return to status quo and there is no need to invade.

However poorly trained and under-equipped the Russian army is, times 1000 it and you have the Ukraine military. They will be no match for whatever force Putin roles through Russia.

I still think an invasion is imminent. Putin has no sense of accountability and doesn't think anyone will do anything to stop him.

[Cerebus]

I doubt civilians with small arms are going to attempt to resist the Russian Army.

Pick up a history book. It's called an insurgency. We just spent a decade fighting one.

Ukrainians have a long history of fighting them, and let's not forget the Tartars, who have sent several thousand men to fight in Syria over last few years.

Let's not forget Russia is ALREADY fighting a Muslim insurgency, and those guys would love to expand it to Ukraine, and could do it easily via connections with the Muslim Crimean Tartars.

However poorly trained and under-equipped the Russian army is, times 1000 it and you have the Ukraine military. They will be no match for whatever force Putin roles through Russia.

Of course the Russians would roll over the Ukrainian Army. Just like the US did in Iraq. Then the insurgency starts.

I still think an invasion is imminent. Putin has no sense of accountability and doesn't think anyone will do anything to stop him.

He has had weeks to do so already. He hasn't. I think Putin has realized he can get what he wants without starting the shit storm of sending in Russian troops.