32 Comments

To use the vernacular of the youngsters of today to describe this post: Nailed it!

Watching this conflict over the past 18 months, a few things became clear to me. With the quickly advancing technology in weapons & surveillance all around the world, in many nations, no nation is "out of reach". The lack of high-quality, integrated, layered air defense here in the US is concerning to me, your point is well taken. Never underestimate your adversaries. You can hate them all you want to, shout all the usual political & social insults about them if it makes you feel superior or comfortable, but feeling superior does not translate into superiority on the battlefield. So much of what I hear from the folks in Washington, London, Brussels, et al are just the same old stereotypes and tropes; Russians are all uneducated peasants without indoor plumbing and the Chinese can only make cheap trinkets for mass consumption and steal technology. Add to that silly type of thinking the profits over efficiency mindset in the MIC money-go-round and we end up with the type of reckless decision making that you've repeatedly hammered home. The people in positions of power in the US/UK/EU/NATO seem to be trapped in some collective fever-dream where the world never changes and they are never wrong. Its absolutely divorced from reality. Narrative over strategy. As Bette Davis once said in a film, "buckle up, its going to be a bumpy flight". Its going to be a very hard landing for these folks & what worries me is what will their reaction be? Unfortunately, we're all strapped in with them. Unfortunately I'll be sitting in economy, where my last meal will be peanuts & pretzels, lol.

Also, my condolences on the loss of your friend.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you all around. I think the Blinken visit to Zelensky is very significant. I am not sure why he rushed over there, but I would guess that Erdogan passed something to him and he took it to Zelensky. I don't know the outcome, but if Zelensky is true to form, he will reject any initiative to settle the conflict, since part of any deal would be he would have to go. Blinken ought to know that, but there was no other urgent reason for him to go to Ukraine. We will learn more, I suspect, in due course. Blinken stuck his head out, for sure.

Expand full comment

I hadn't thought about the Erdogan angle (but this is why I subscribe to you lol) - he does always avail himself to be right in the middle of things. Wonder if the grain deal was any part of that message, too. I did think Blinken's trip was, at the least, questionable optics given the crisis in Maui and the hurricane in Florida. Seeing lots of comments from folks questioning $1 billion to Ukraine while we have humanitarian crisis at home.

Expand full comment

Elections are due next March.

I doubt Zelensky will stand.

Expand full comment
author

if they have an election at all

Expand full comment

As Svein Tore Ulset posted below, Zelensky originally said no elections since they are under martial law; but if I recall correctly he made a statement more recently that in order to hold elections, Ukraine would need $5 billion from the US.

Expand full comment

I think Zelenska might prefer to wear stilettos somewhere else.

Expand full comment

Elections are postponed indefenitely, under martial law. No elections in Ukraine, except in the four oblasts that voted to join Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Ukrainian_presidential_election

Expand full comment

With no opposition and no opposition media, not to mention unconditional western support as their neocon poster boi, Zelenskii will do just fine.

Expand full comment

The US (NATO) create weapon systems to generate profits; Russia creates weapons to efficiently kill. For example: Ford Class carriers vs. Gorshkov Class frigates, armed with Zircon. The US is fighting the last "real war," from 80 years ago.

Expand full comment

The US and NATO deliberately and relentlessly pursued a conflict with both Russia and China for no valid reason at all.

In any sane world, the recognition that stopping to do so and starting to honestly look for a peaceful longterm modus vivendi is long overdue would be the single most important lesson.

Stopping to dream about complete global full spectrum dominance and unlimited unipolar power like some sort of psychotic supervillain would be the necessary first step.

Expand full comment

"raising the question of why the US and NATO were willing to raid its already paltry stocks for Ukraine"

An excellent question, but I believe the answer is that they thought the Russians would fold like a cheap shirt following sanctions, "superior" NATO war doctrine, western 4CISR, and the plucky Ukro-Nazi offensives.

Expand full comment

excellent overview and summation stephen.. thanks...

another way of looking at nato - to keep russia down, germany out and the usa on top... so long as europe plays along with this - and poland gets a special nod for being such a good usa servant - things might continue on like this for some time.. this cold war, mccarthy era relic of an organization needs to be done away with, but the military contractors and politicians who keep them in the money - will not allow it... it is a big ponzi scheme to support the military and banking complex, but the cosmetics on its public facade say different... that is not a winning hand as i see it..

Expand full comment

There is no tank made that can withstand an artillery shell hit. It's also good to remember that there are a number of weapons systems that have not been supplied to Ukraine, since there's no reason to give Russia an opportunity to develop defensive options for stopping them.

Expand full comment
author

I think we have shipped many front line systems to Ukraine so the thesis that we have held back is only partially true and somewhat fleeting. For example, there are reports the US will now supply ATACMS missiles to Ukraine. Furthermore, some of what we have supplied (advanced radars, NSAMs etc) are front line hardware. I agree that no tank can withstand an artillery hit, although most of the tanks being destroyed are hit by drones such as Lancet, by Vikhrs missiles fired from Ka-52 helicopters and by Kornet missiles (two man crew). Just yesterday two more Challenger II tanks were destroyed by Kornet antitank missiles, making it 3 Challengers destroyed so far. These are the UKs front line tanks at present. The Kornet uses a tandem warhead and seems able to punch through Leopards and Challengers.

Expand full comment

Russian Zaporozhye governor Balitsky's recent comment on 2 destroyed Challengers seems to refer to the two tanks (1 Challenger) hit between Robotyne and Verbove on 5 September, rather than a subsequent kill?

But why send a 'sniper tank' into a narrow salient on rising ground under increasing flanking fire anyway?

Almost a tank trap.

Expand full comment
author

Today the Russian press is claiming two kills. Challenger II is a main battle tank and very heavy, so I don't know about the term "sniper" tank? The Russians say the tanks were knocked out by Kornet anti-tank missiles, so they were hit at fairly close range.

Expand full comment

David Axe:

“This tank is like a sniper rifle,” the [AFU] tanker said while standing next to his four-person, 69-ton Challenger 2.

For tank battles it has heavy armour with highly accurate and deadly longrange fire, but why was it being used as close mobile artillery so exposed to enemy artillery and missiles?

I guess because Kyiv is desperate for a breakthrough at Verbove?

Expand full comment
author

OK, I never heard that reference before.

Expand full comment

More seriously, NATO may be learning that tanks aren't a big part of its future.

Expand full comment

Maybe the tanker had been watching Sean Bean in the Peninsular War...

The Challenger is I think the only current MBT with rifled gun.

Good, according to some, for HESH rounds, but like so much British culture, perhaps more about nostalgia than efficacy.

Or: Crimea?... Wrong peninsula...

Expand full comment
author

They are planning to upgrade to a 120mm smooth bore for Challenger III

Expand full comment

Zelensky recently talked about upcoming quinquennial elections (he said in 2019 he would serve only one term).

It would be difficult to sell a pause now as better than Minsk II, so perhaps he'll step aside for some 'National Unity Front' next year.

He's said it would also depend on his family.

Zelenska has had only one Vogue cover since the war began, and their daughter is approaching Ivy League age.

Expand full comment

Somebody, Russia, China, some unknown unknown will sense our weakness and strike us hard realizing that oceans are no longer good defensive barriers. Then wokeness will prove our ultimate downfall and what’s left will start over. We’ll be long gone of course.

Expand full comment

In the not too distant future, after the deaths of additional hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians (and Russians), Ukraine will find peace by yielding Crimea and the Russian speaking Donbas. This along with the now clearly dubious assurance of NATO to guard against future Russian invasions. It’s the only possible solution.

Expand full comment

The chasm between the real story now and the official version seems greater than at any point since Comical Ali, or maybe General Westmoreland.

Expand full comment

Reznikov's outrage at the idea of negotiations on The Guardian today seems a bit of a giveaway about proposed giveaways.

With the failure to force a salient below Orikhiv, even throwing in Challengers, it looks like we're entering a new sort of choreography.

Expand full comment

An analysis that needed to be written--and read by those will not want to read it and likely won't.

2 minor points:

a. why mention only European arms factories being attacked in a general war?--all US dynamite, for example, is manufactured at one aging plant.

b. 'when the Ukrainian adventure ends'--if NATO continues to demonstrate its lack of readiness--indeed an emerging inability to even get ready to improve readiness (is it because the MIC lacks a business model for sustainment or massive capital investments that may offer unsatisfactory returns compared to F-35s and gold toilet seats?), then shouldn't NATO be more concerned that Russia may simply decide they may never face a less competent, less prepared version of NATO, & that now's the time to end this 70-year Nazi/NATO problem once and for all?

Expand full comment

Excellent analysis.

Expand full comment

Eventually, will NATO/US decide using nuclear weapons is the only solution? Kings over the ash heaps?

Expand full comment

depends whether the unelected moneyed elite (or western oligarch) want to keep doubling up at the casino table or not...

Expand full comment

This is the correct answer.

Expand full comment
Error