(Image by NEIVANMADE)
We now have a positive identification on the Ukrainian Soldier executed in a Russian war crime. His name was Tymofiy Shadura of the 30th Separate Mechanized Brigade which has been fighting for Bakhmut. Both the Ukrainian military and his sister have made a preliminary identification from the video.
MoD identified this soldier as Tymofii Shadura, a serviceman of the 30th Separate Mechanized Brigade. He was considered missing near Bakhmut. The body is now in the temporarily occupied territory.
Russia will pay for this.
Glory to Ukraine! Glory to heroes! pic.twitter.com/eHzm5IUrc7— Maria Avdeeva (@maria_avdv) March 7, 2023
On Tuesday, Ukraine’s military named the soldier as Tymofiy Shadura, citing preliminary information.
His unit, the 30th Separate Mechanised Brigade, said he was last seen on 3 February near the eastern city of Bakhmut – the scene of fierce fighting in recent months.
But it added that the identification could only be completed after the body was returned.
Before the soldier was named, Mr Shadura’s sister, Olia, said she recognised her brother: “[He] would certainly be capable of standing up to the Russians like that,” she told the BBC.
However, there is some doubt over the identity of the soldier, with one well-known Ukrainian journalist naming him as somebody else.
Mr Shadura’s sister later told the BBC that she was not collecting money on behalf of relatives due to the conflicting reports on the unarmed soldier’s identity.
“I recognise my brother in that video. But if that’s not him, then I feel for his relatives, and in that case can someone help me to find my brother?”
Here is President Zelenskyy’s address from earlier today. Video below, English transcript after the jump:
Ukraine will always remember its heroes, our memory of them will endure, and our enemy will perish – address by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy
7 March 2023 – 19:00
Ukrainians!
Today, Dmytro Kotsiubaylo, “Da Vinci”, Hero of Ukraine, volunteer, man-symbol, man of courage, was killed in action. A fighter of the 67th separate mechanized brigade, a commander of a battalion. He was killed in the battle near Bakhmut, in the battle for Ukraine.
Since 2014, he has been defending our independence and the dignity of our people. One of the youngest heroes of Ukraine. One of those whose personal history, character, and courage have forever become the history, character, and courage of Ukraine.
For more than nine years, Ukrainian heroes have been fighting for Ukraine’s future in fierce battles for the country. Peace and relative safety in the rear cities is their feat. Our confidence in Ukraine’s victory is their resilience and strength.
Ukraine will always remember its heroes. Our memory of them will endure, and the enemy that came to Ukraine will perish.
The 67th brigade, warriors, glory to your bravery! All Ukrainians who are fighting for Bakhmut, glory to your heroism!
I am grateful to all the warriors whose resilience and perseverance destroy the occupier’s army in Donbas!
Today, I would like to praise the 10th separate mountain assault brigade, 56th separate motorized infantry brigade, 93rd and 54th separate mechanized brigades for their results. Glory to you, warriors!
The marines of the “thirty-fifth”, the paratroopers of the 79th air assault brigade, the 55th artillery brigade, our gunners. Glory to you, warriors!
Our border guards, the National Guard, intelligence, security forces operating in Donbas… Glory to all those delivering results for Ukraine in the toughest battles!
Glory to every soldier, sergeant, officer, and general who is in combat with their men!
We are doing everything we can to liberate our land as soon as possible, to put a historical end to the attempts to deprive our state and our people of their freedom. All the activities of our state and everyone who helps are aimed at this goal.
Today I would like to thank our entire team involved in the exchanges once again. Budanov, Yermak, Klymenko, Usov, Lubinets.
130 warriors were brought home from Russian captivity. And all 130 are privates and sergeants. The Army, Navy, National Guard, border guards, and other parts of the defense forces.
Just as we remember every corner of our country that is under occupation, we remember every single person in Russian captivity.
We will release everyone. I thank all our soldiers on the frontline who realize how important it is for us, for Ukraine, to replenish the exchange fund.
No matter what, we have to endure. No matter what, we must remember all our heroes.
Glory to all Ukrainians who are now in combat!
Eternal memory to all those who gave their lives for Ukraine!
Glory to Ukraine!
R.I.P.
Dmytro “Da Vinci” Kotsiubailo, the decorated Hero of Ukraine.
Killed in action. pic.twitter.com/yrSk0psbg5— Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 (@IAPonomarenko) March 7, 2023
Here is former NAVDEVGRU Squadron Leader Chuck Pfarrer’s most recent assessment of the situations in Kreminna and Bakhmut:
KREMINNA /1900 UTC 7 MAR/ RU resumed offensive operations across the P-66 HWY with a probe at Nevske; it was repelled by UKR forces. S of Kreminna, RU forces were again defeated S of Bilohorvika. A UKR missile/ artillery strike destroyed a BuK M1/2 surface to air missile system. pic.twitter.com/hfHdWLuZFS
— Chuck Pfarrer | Indications & Warnings | (@ChuckPfarrer) March 7, 2023
CULMINATION? RU’s failed attack at Dubovo-Vasylivka marks one of the most severe Russian defeats in the long campaign to take the city of Bakhmut. UKR reinforcements are now assessed to be deployed in strong defensive lines in the city and surrounding areas.
— Chuck Pfarrer | Indications & Warnings | (@ChuckPfarrer) March 7, 2023
Here’s a better look at Pfarrer’s most recent map of the situation in Bakhmut:
(Map by Chuck Pfarrer)
The New Voice of Ukraine has more on the battle for Bakhmut:
The Ukrainian defense of the town of Bakhmut, Donetsk Oblast, continues to degrade forces on both sides, the UK’s Ministry of Defense wrote on Twitter on March 7.
UK intelligence said that over the weekend, Ukrainian forces likely stabilized their defensive perimeter following previous Russian advances into the north of the town.
“A Russian strike destroyed a bridge over the only paved supply road into Bakhmut still under Ukrainian control around March 2,” the ministry said in its daily summary.
“Muddy conditions are likely hampering Ukrainian resupply efforts as they increasingly resort to using unpaved tracks.”The agency also notes that public disagreements between the Wagner Group and Russian Ministry of Defense over the allocation of munitions highlights Russia’s difficulty in sustaining the high levels of personnel and ammunition required to advance with their current tactics.
Heavy fighting for Bakhmut has been underway for more than six months. According to Ukraine’s Defense Ministry, Russia loses up to 500 soldiers killed and wounded every day, trying to storm the town. This figure exceeds Ukrainian losses by five times, according to NATO intelligence.
Here’s the British MOD’s assessment:
The Ukrainian Soldier who Tweets as Tatarigami has posted this very informative thread on Russian military attitudes towards the war. First Tweet from his thread, the rest from The Thread Reader App:
🧵Thread:
For those seeking a greater understanding of the russian soldier's perspective on the war, motivation, and attitudes, I recommend reading this thread, as I decided to compile and generalize some materials. pic.twitter.com/lfLp34jTMV
— Tatarigami_UA (@Tatarigami_UA) March 7, 2023
2/ I was hesitant to publish this thread as I cannot provide the original evidence until the war is over. However, I feel it is important to share the information and allow readers to form their own opinions.3/ The materials primarily consist of over a hundred conversations obtained from chat applications on the devices of deceased russian soldiers and confessions from some prisoners of war. While it may not be a representative sample, I want to discuss some noticeable commonalities.4/ It may be surprising, but discussions among soldiers about topics such as the perceived NATO threat, denazification, world war, or other forms of patriotic propaganda frequently promoted on Russian television are not as prevalent as one might assume.5/ It appears that for many soldiers and officers, this war is solely a source of financial gain, with little regard for the immoral acts they commit. In light of this, I have assembled a list, in no specific order, of subjects that Russian soldiers regularly converse about:6/
– Upgrading their apartments with their spouses, making plans to trade an apartment and add more rooms.
– Buying cars for themselves or their spouses
– Paying off mortgages, car payments, or similar debts
– Paying off child support debts– Getting a combat veteran ID to receive state benefits for the rest of the life
– Saving money to take their families on vacation by the sea.
– Getting new furniture, home electronics, smartphones8/ It appears that a significant number of soldiers view the war as an opportunity to earn money, and frequently engage in casual conversations about their expected financial gains from the war. The following is a slightly edited conversation, which highlights this attitude:09/ “We have been shelling the kho**ols (ethnic slur for Ukrainians) in the town for three days. If we finish them off soon, I hope that our commander will let me go home by the summer. With my salary, I should have enough savings so we can buy a new car and drive to the sea.”10/ Interestingly, these conversations sometimes intertwine with discussions about salary issues, as soldiers try to understand why they haven’t received their compensation or why they received less than expected. However, the topic of payment deserves a separate conversation.11/ It is misleading to claim that mobilized soldiers are victims of the war and had no choice. Conversations among soldiers suggest that few express criticism of the war itself. Instead, criticisms tend to focus on the perceived incompetence of the command12/ or the perceived insufficient use of force to win. Some believe that they should “stop playing around” and just raze entire cities or conduct nuclear strikes so they can go home earlier. Keep that in mind when they will tell you about the “we just followed the orders” story.
The New York Times and Zeit are both out with reporting alleging that intelligence now points to unnamed and unknown Russians and Ukrainians responsible for blowing the NordStream2 pipeline. Since the Zeit article is in German and I’m relying on a less than stellar machine translation, let’s take a look at the NY Times coverage. These are the caveat hedge words being used in The New York Times article:
New intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials suggests that a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines last year, a step toward determining responsibility for an act of sabotage that has confounded investigators on both sides of the Atlantic for months.
U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials.
U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains. They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services.
Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. U.S. officials said no American or British nationals were involved.
Officials said there were still enormous gaps in what U.S. spy agencies and their European partners knew about what transpired. But officials said it might constitute the first significant lead to emerge from several closely guarded investigations, the conclusions of which could have profound implications for the coalition supporting Ukraine.
U.S. officials who have been briefed on the intelligence are divided about how much weight to put on the new information. All of them spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss classified intelligence and matters of sensitive diplomacy.
What I see here is A LOT of hemming and hawing. This reads like someone described raw intel that was largely inconclusive to reporters for The New York Times because it definitely exonerated the US and largely exonerates the Ukrainians. Here’s is Matt Tait’s, the security professional who Tweets as Pwnallthethings, reaction:
What the IC means by low confidence: "idk, but my guess is X"
What the public hears when it's reported: "omg secret spies discovered X, so X it is"
— @[email protected] (@pwnallthethings) March 7, 2023
Anyway, good to know that either Ukrainians or Russians or maybe someone else but probably anti-putin group that wasn't associated with a government but probably likes zelensky bombed NS2 but maybe with prior government training but who knows really. Super specific and helpful.
— @[email protected] (@pwnallthethings) March 7, 2023
A far more interesting and informative piece by Zeit. Way more details, and focused on new alleged facts, not vague reports inside US IC. https://t.co/Ys9YoVOSVP
— @[email protected] (@pwnallthethings) March 7, 2023
I’m in basic agreement with Tait, this reporting uses a lot of words to basically tell us no one has any idea what happened other than the pipeline blew.
Oh for sure. But also my thoughts on this won't fit in a tweet
— @[email protected] (@pwnallthethings) March 7, 2023
I’ve included the above exchange, because Alexander has, as far as I’m concerned, produced the best open source analysis of what actually happened to the pipeline: (I am not copying and pasting his imagery, click across and see that for yourself)
While digging through mountains of Nord Stream data as part of my series debunking Seymour Hersh’s claims of a top secret US-Norwegian mission to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines during BALTOPS22, I discovered some information that may provide an alternative theory.
As previously stated, this is a hypothesis in progress and as such as new information is discovered, the hypothesis will change. While doing more research I found information that “debunked” my previous hypothesis of the Pioneering Spirit being the culprit responsible for the poor workmanship that may have resulted in the Southern Nord Stream 2 leak. At the same time though, I have found more corroborating evidence pointing to the fact that poor workmanship was in fact to blame for the Southern NS2 leak.
Here is my updated hypothesis with the newly acquired information gathered through additional research.
Since September, the single Nord Stream 2 explosion ∼80km away from the two following Nord Stream 1 blasts has puzzled me. Not only was it ∼80km away from the other blasts, it happened 17 hours prior at 02:03 local time on September 26th.
I have continuously been looking for a possible explanation for this, and I may have found one while staring at AIS data on MarineTraffic. The navigational warning locations, just gave a rough idea of the locations of the leaks, but could not be used to identify which pipe had been ruptured at which location. I believe that I have located the exact location of all the Nord Stream leaks, as well as which pipe ruptured where. This was done by using AIS data to track the Normand Frontier and a few other vessels that were tasked with investigations of the sites following the ruptures.
Here we see the Normand Frontier investigating the Nord Stream 1 sabotage site in the Danish EEZ. As can be seen, it is entirely focused on the southern line, especially one specific area.
Here we see the Normand Frontier investigating the Nord Stream 1 sabotage site in the Swedish EEZ. Here the vessel is entirely focused on the northern line, especially one specific area.
Here we see the Normand Frontier investigating the Southern Nord Stream 2 site off the coast of Bornholm. Here the vessel is entirely focused on the western line and very much focused on a small area of the pipe.
Here we see the Normand Frontier investigating the smaller, later discovered northern Nord Stream 2 leak on the same pipe as the southern leak, in close proximity to the Nord Stream 1 leaks.
Having discovered this I noticed that while the location of the Pioneering Spirit during the storm on December 15th 2019 was directly over the leak location, this may in fact just be the coincidence of the century as the leak appears to be on the other line.
The ruptured line was laid by the Allseas Solitaire, which did not reach this location before December 20th 2019, after the Pioneering Spirits deviation on the December 15th.Allseas suspended all Nord Stream 2 pipe laying activities on the 21st December 2019, following Trump signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (NDAA) into law, which placed sanctions on Nord Stream 2. The NDAA has previously passed through the House of Representatives on the 11th December 2019.
The Allseas Solitaire was stationary at the above location for approximately 5 hours from 16:00 UTC to 21:00 UTC with sanctions becoming active within hours. I believe that this was when the Allseas Solitaire finished its work on Nord Stream 2 and proceeded to begin the process of abandonment of the pipe.
Approximately a year and half later, in late April 2021, the Russian flagged Akademik Cherskiy would pick up where the Allseas Solitaire left off. Here it would proceed to continue the work of laying the pipe by recovering the already laid pipe that had previously been abandoned by the Allseas Solitaire.
Prior to the Akademik Cherskiy resuming the work on Nord Stream 2 there were doubts about whether the vessel was even able to complete the Nord Stream pipeline adquitely.
“Moreover, the Akademik Cherskiy will not be able to provide the same, top-class speed of pipe-laying like Allseas’ vessels could showcase. Rather, the Cherskiy will probably not be able to lay more than about 3 km of pipe per day, and that velocity would be even further reduced if the vessel cannot use its Dynamic Positioning system but has to be positioned with anchors instead.”
The Jamestown Foundation, 2020
Additional questions where raised about whether Russia had a crew that was skilled enough to complete work using the Akademik Cherskiy.
“Thus far, the Cherskiy reportedly has never been used in a pipelaying operation like the one that is needed to complete Nord Stream Two, leading to questions of the availability of Russian personnel who could operate the vessel for the pipe deployment”
The Jamestown Foundation, 2020
Afterwards there were reports of the Akademik Cherskiy having a miryad of technical issues and problems during its work on the Nord Stream 2 pipline.
”Few people know that KMTUS “Akademik Chersky” had problems with the laying of the “A” line. Purely technical. He even had to go back, lift the pipe already laid on a section of several kilometers, cut it into metal and re-lay it, because inconsistencies with the requirements for tightness of the joints were found. With a design maximum laying speed of 3,15 km / day (with a wind speed of no more than 4 m / s), “Akademik Chersky” gave at most 400 m / day.”
Laying of Nord Stream 2: the problems of Akademik Chersky turned out to be a reality
While looking at the AIS tracks of the vessels investigating the Nord Stream ruptures, it also became apparent that the area the vessels were interested in was significantly smaller by the Southern Nord Stream 2 leak. The BBC expedition with the help of Blueye Robotics showed that at the Nord Stream 1 site approximately 250 meters of pipe were missing or destroyed.
If we look at the AIS track of the Glomar Worker at the southern Nord Stream 2 leak, it appears to only be doing a detailed survey of a very small sub-100 meter length of the pipe. The Glomar Worker was also only interested surveying the two Nord Stream 2 leaks, as it did not at any point survey the areas of the Nord Stream 1 leaks.
Theory
This brings me to my current working theory. It was in no party’s interests to destroy 3 of the 4 Nord Stream lines. It can be argued that the US/NATO had motivation to destroy all 4 lines. At the same time it can be argued that Russia had motivation to blow NS1, but not NS2. The destruction of 3 was always a mystery.I believe explosives were planted on the two lines of Nord Stream 1, possibly by the Minerva Julie or while the ship was providing cover for the operation. This ship had a very strange track directly above the location of the NS1 explosions from the 5th September to 13th September while on route to Saint Petersburg. This was also directly after Russia cut gas supplies through Nord Stream 1 on August 31st 2022. The Minerva Julie left Rotterdam the following day on route towards St. Petersburg on September 1st.
It is also a possibility that the Minerva Julie was not directly involved in the planting of explosives, but was ordered to maneuver over the site for the time period. This could have been done to provide as much cover, both visual and acoustic, for whatever vessel or submarine was used to place the charges. The Minerva Julie continuously sailing over the area would have made much of the possible detailed surveillance of the site impossible.
I theorize that the initial Nord Stream 2 rupture was an accident, potentially the result poor workmanship by the Akademik Cherskiy due to an inadequate vessel and inexperienced crew.
Once this pipe had ruptured, the remaining pipes would probably be inspected to ensure that there was no risk of further leaks. This process would have revealed the explosives planted on the Nord Stream 1 pipes. Due to this the plan to potentially destroy Nord Stream 1 in the future was accelerated and the explosives were detonated 17 hours after the initial rupture at 19:03 local time.
Destroying Nord Stream 1 would allow Russia to increase pressure on Germany, while at the same time not being a massive loss, as they stated that it was “out of commission”. Russia had stated that the decreased flow and eventual shutdown of Nord Stream 1 was caused by European Union sanctions against Russia, which had resulted in technical problems they could not remedy.
This would leave the operational, but never opened Nord Stream 2 available to supply Germany with natural gas immediately after the shock of the destruction of Nord Stream 1. This is something Putin still offered Germany through the one remaining Nord Stream 2 line. Germany turned down the offer.
I believe that the charges were in place on Nord Stream 1, hoping for Germany and Europe to be in a more dire situation during the winter. They would then be blown in an attempt to pressure Europe to give up on Ukraine.
Additionally, only the Swedish government has publicly confirmed finding explosive residue on the debris found at the sites of the Nord Stream explosions. There has been no public mention of Denmark finding explosive residue specifically at the NS2 site.
On the 25th October, the US “unofficially” requested permission from Denmark to send a destroyer to inspect the NS2 leak location. I believe that the USS Roosevelt was used for this task. The USS Roosevelt entered the Baltic Sea on the 16th and left on the 27th and had its AIS off.
From the information currently available, The US was only interested in inspecting the southern NS2 leak. This makes me wonder whether the U.S. was confused about this leak. They may have had evidence of the reason behind the other leaks, but not this one.
There is much, much, much more at the link. Including all the vessel track imagery and pipeline damage imagery that Alexander has found and posted. You really need to click across and look at it while reading his entire post to do his analysis justice. And I find his analysis compelling because it is internally logically consistent and it is as parsimonious as an explanation for something like this could be. Basically, he’s produced the Occam’s razor explanation and it sure as hell has a lot more details and makes a lot more sense than all the hemming and hawing in The New York Times reporting.
Tblisi:
The President of Georgia supported the protesters against the "bill on foreign agents".
— 301 Military (@301military) March 7, 2023
Protesters in Tbilisi are trying to break into the parliament building. Local TV channels broadcast footage of protesters demolishing several fences at the entrance to the building. pic.twitter.com/RDO9cRoV0C
— 301 Military (@301military) March 7, 2023
Special forces of the Georgian police began moving towards the parliament along Rustaveli Boulevard. pic.twitter.com/baHldnemCB
— 301 Military (@301military) March 7, 2023
I was beginning to wonder how long it would take for something like this to happen. The Georgian prime minister and his Georgian Dream Party are in Putin’s orbit. Bloomberg, via YahooNews, has the details on the foreign agents law:
(Bloomberg) — For nearly two decades since the 2003 “Rose Revolution,” Georgia sought to escape Russia’s shadow by integrating itself with the European Union and NATO.
Now, critics say, it risks tilting back toward Moscow, especially as the government pushes through legislation similar to an instrument President Vladimir Putin used to crush dissent in Russia.
A draft “foreign agent” bill that lawmakers passed on Tuesday in the first reading would target media and non-governmental organizations in an initiative backed by the ruling Georgian Dream party. It would indirectly promote Russian interests by curbing the influence of groups that largely rely on funding from the US and Europe.
Police fired tear gas and used water cannon to try to disperse demonstrators after several thousand people gathered outside the parliament in Tbilisi to protest the vote.
President Salome Zourabichvili, who’s on a visit to New York, said in a late-night address to demonstrators that “I stand with you because you represent free Georgia.” Lawmakers who supported the draft law had violated Georgia’s constitution, which required officials to “do everything possible to take this country to the EU,” she said, calling for the measure to be abandoned.
Georgia’s president is officially unaffiliated with any political party, she is backed, wink wink nudge nudge, by the Georgian Dream Party.
That’s enough for tonight.
Your daily Patron!
A new behind-the-scenes episode is out. It is about me and my supersniff power☺️ Take a look! https://t.co/XfJAoR3out pic.twitter.com/tXd3LbE2t6
— Patron (@PatronDsns) March 7, 2023
And a new video from Patron’s official TikTok!
@patron__dsns
Open thread!
Michael Bersin
A Federal District Court judge in Missouri (in Jefferson City) has issued an opinion that Missouri’s Second Amendment Preservation Act (SAPA) passed by the right wingnut controlled General Assembly and signed into law by Governor Hee-Haw (r) in 2021 is unconstitutional because of that pesky Supremacy Clause. Anyone with half a brain could have seen this one coming.
Eric Burlison (r), one of the sponsors of the bill, now a U.S. Representative in the 7th Congressional District, has a sad:
Send in the clown (r)
Alison Rose
That’s a stirring line right there. The man has a way with words, as always.
It’s honestly incredibly disturbing to me that the orcs are sitting around all giddy about the fancy cars and new furniture they’re gonna buy with their blood money. I mean, I want a nicer apartment too, I’m not gonna murder people to get it, though. Sick bastards.
And I see the New York Times is New York Timesing again. Sigh.
Thank you as always, Adam.
Manyakitty
Holy shit. And you posted this just after 5:30. That last twist in Georgia was a doozy!
Manyakitty
@Michael Bersin: whomp whomp 😂
Anonymous At Work
Question: WTF was NYTimes thinking by writing that the perpetrator of the NORD-2 bombing *could* be a non-governmental group? What civilian organizations teach precision underwater demolitions? Aren’t the real choices between current versus former Special Forces?
Also, suddenly curious whether your assessment of Bakhmut being sent “all necessary reinforcement” sounds like UA’s psychops prior to Kharkiv Offensive, about how “all the troops” were being sent to attack Kherson. Chasing at shadows or plausible?
Adam L Silverman
@Anonymous At Work: Erik Prince is a former SEAL. And he’s tried to do business with Lukashenko recently.
https://matthewcole.substack.com/p/exclusive-erik-princes-love-letter
Much more at the link.
Sparkedcat
Tymofii Shadura is a hero of Ukraine. His balls are in proportion to those used in bowling alleys. Slava Ukraini. Long live Tymofii Shadura!
Manyakitty
@Sparkedcat: Heroyam Slava!
trnc
This is a very shoot from the hip opinion, but it might be the rare case where I don’t think the press is to blame if they are reporting the facts. Perhaps the IC should reassess their own assessments and decide that anything they’re currently rating as low confidence instead be labeled inconclusive.
Bill Arnold
@Anonymous At Work:
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/underwater-demolition-salary-13895.html
Also, the explosions were in relatively shallow water. Within the capabilities of non-state actors, theoretically at least.
Joe Falco
The situation in Georgia is good news for the ghost of John McCain.
Anonymous At Work
@Adam L Silverman: I guess my point is that Erik Prince is former military, a former SEAL. He hires other former military whose grasp of morals and ethics is questionable at best, to a negative on their application at worst. But he is former military, and hires former military. There is no civilian training agency for the type of underwater demolitions that Navy SEALS perform.
Anonymous At Work
@Bill Arnold: Interesting except that half the Training Section is about how you should be an ex-SEAL. The other half is about being an ex-EOD or bomb squad member who has undergone advanced underwater training.
japa21
A couple comments on Pfarrer’s reports.
First on Kreminna. It is important to remember that Russian is on defense there. This is a very critical place for them. If they lose Keminna they are in big trouble. What appears to be happening is that they have learned that just sitting there and waiting and probably losing like in other places, they are trying to counter Ukrainian moves, with very limited success.
On Bakhmut, just perhaps Ukraine is turning the corner. Russia has been so intent on taking Bakhmut, just so they can claim they won something, they may have over done it. The post last night talked about how Ukrainians were complaining about not getting support, artillery support and otherwise. Tonight’s report from Pfarrer seems to say the opposite. Russia’s tactics have a real sense of desperation to them. Almost like they know it is now or never.
Of course, this is a civilian looking at this and making these comments, so take them for what they are worth.
Albatrossity
Thanks for these updates, Adam. I, and I suspect many others, have come to rely on them.
Re the Nordstream pipeline story, it’s all pretty foggy, for sure. But one thing that is crystal clear is that the headlines ALL talk about “pro-Ukrainian” folks doing the deed, rather than “anti-Putin” forces. A subtle but important language choice, this rhetorical choice makes it easier to cast Ukraine in a bad light…
oldster
Adam, you’re a trooper for producing these every night.
And every night, they are extremely valuable for us readers.
Thanks.
Ruckus
@Alison Rose:
I’m not condoning them but the reality is that if you are in their position you likely do not want to talk about it. First, you don’t know who might be listening and if you want them to know or not. Second you very likely do not want to be talking about why you are there. And I imagine that in vlad’s military there might be an even better reason not to discuss the million ton disaster in front of you or any thing along those lines.
Anoniminous
Officer Says He Refuses to Obey Orders
This is a Mutiny. Another illustrative point that the “Second Army in the World” is a bunch of undisciplined rabble.
kindness
If (big if mind you) Ukraine could (somehow) manage to seize Putin and bring him to Ukrainian soil, would it be possible to bring Putin before the Hague and try him for war crimes? Or would the UN weenie out on it and release Putin?
Chetan Murthy
@Anoniminous: Uh, that link goes to a lebanese spice recipe
Chetan Murthy
@kindness: If UA managed somehow to seize some of these leading war criminals, I doubt they’d give ’em up to The Hague. Why do it? Convene your own war crimes tribunals *in Ukraine*. Sure, invite EU or other judges and of course observers. But why give up control over the proceedings?
dr. luba
@Anoniminous: You may wish to check that link.
smith
@Chetan Murthy: Haven’t they already started trying Russian soldiers they’ve captured when they have evidence they committed war crimes? Not the big cheeses, of course, but I think if they were lucky enough to snag a high-ranking officer who’d ordered a strike on a hospital, say, I’m sure they would try him themselves.
Chetan Murthy
@smith: yyep
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-kyiv-war-crimes-sentencing-1590d0aa9c36870925304fbab5cfba47
Anoniminous
@Chetan Murthy:
@dr. luba:
shit
OK then ….
Lebanese 7 Spice Recipe
There. Fixed.
Mallard Filmore
@kindness:
If Ukraine manages to capture Putin, I sincerely hope that their route to The Hague does NOT pass through Ukraine territory.
Jay
@Mallard Filmore:
If Ukraine manages to capture Putin, I sincerely hope that their route to The Hague does NOT go to the Hague.
Chetan Murthy
@Jay: I’m curious: why not ?
Omnes Omnibus
@Chetan Murthy:
As satisfying as some here may find a summary execution, it isn’t the right thing to do.
Jay
@Chetan Murthy:
I do not trust “International” organs, at this point in time, to administer justice to Pootie -Poot, as long as Russia has not repudated him.
Chetan Murthy
@Omnes Omnibus: Why would you expect Ukraine to summarily execute him? I would expect instead a series of war crimes trials — lots of them, followed by, sure, execution, but years later. It won’t be fast, b/c they’ll want to use it to show the world that they’re a modern nation.
@Jay: For sure, I agree with you. Too easy to bribe ’em, and Vova has enough $$ to do it a hundred times over.
Chetan Murthy
“Sermon” is the right word for it.
Omnes Omnibus
@Chetan Murthy: I wouldn’t expect Ukraine to do it. I would not be surprised at all if groups of Ukrainians wanted to do it though.
Chetan Murthy
@Omnes Omnibus: I make this analogy with some trepidation, but: Israel did not summarily execute Eichmann: they first tried him in open court before the world, found him guilty, and then executed him. Why should Ukraine behave differently ?
randy khan
The discussion of low confidence intelligence estimates made me think of some research on how people see probability estimates – basically they translate them all into “definitely not,” “fifty-fifty,” and “definitely,” and it takes a lot of effort, even with intelligent and educated people, to get them to understand that the probability of something is anything other than one of those three choices.
(I have an example from my own work of this – a group of us spent literally weeks trying to figure out the likelihood that the FCC would do something, and finally came down to saying that it was slightly more likely than not to do it. We transmitted this conclusion, with a detailed explanation and all the caveats you could imagine, to the guy who’d asked for it, who then proceeded to tell the board of directors that the FCC definitely would do it.)
Omnes Omnibus
@Chetan Murthy:
Please read the actual words I wrote.
Carlo Graziani
Note that a “low confidence IC assessment” could mean one of (at least) two different things:
(Thing 1): Evidence, possibly pointing at some conclusion, that the analyst consensus thinks is very weak;
(Thing 2): Very suggestive evidence, with lots of gaps, that has lead to sharp divisions within the IC analyst corps between those who weight the evidence more heavily and those who think the gaps are a significant weakness.
This is a level of nuance that is simply not communicated to media, because it inevitably draws out a public discussion of the evidence itself, which is likely fearsomely classified.
Chetan Murthy
@Omnes Omnibus: I did; I took your words to mean that some group(s) would take matters into their own hands and execute him. But that didn’t happen in Israel (at least, as far as I know, and I’m no historian).
smith
I know we’re just talking in hypotheticals here, but state executions are most likely off the table. Ukraine employing the death penalty wouldn’t be at all helpful to its hopes of joining the EU, all of whose members have abolished it.
Carlo Graziani
@Chetan Murthy: I fear that I may perhaps be to blame, having posted a comically phrased Putin-execution scenario yesterday.
So to be clear, that was not intended as a replacement scenario for an orderly judicial process in which Putin is brought to account for his responsibilities, in the mold of the Milosevic, Mladic, et al. trials. It was, however, a satire of Russian judicial proceedings, combined with an appeal to a precedent for Russian constitutional succession (to wit, Beria).
And to make the point more serious, if Putin is in fact summarily shot, it is in my opinion the overwhelming likelihood that his executioners will be his successors in power.
sdhays
@Carlo Graziani: After the reporting on “low confidence” assessments of the origins of COVID-19 and the reports from FBI regarding Trump not being under investigation prior to the 2016 election, I don’t have any “confidence” that they have any evidence at all. For all we know, they’re deliberately lying to the FTFNYT to mess with Russia or Ukraine or Biden or whoever.
Bill Arnold
@randy khan:
Can be taught, though.
My father taught his kids at a young age (<10 YO) to habitually attempt to estimate the probability (0 to 1) that a belief was true, and to always be willing to correct one’s beliefs. This sort of very basic metacognition is very useful, and should be regularly taught in schools.
Also, here’s a useful (and possibly amusing) heuristic:
Impossible things
Carlo Graziani
@sdhays: I try to cut the IC analysts some slack. They are, by-and-large, professional and dispassionate civil servants. But their ability to do their job is poisoned when political appointees require them to produce predetermined outcomes. At least since W., that’s been their lot under GOP administrations, whereas Democratic administrations have largely been willing to listen, and perhaps to push back, but generally to learn.
They are heroes for what they accomplished on Russian Intentions as of October 2021
ETA: As are the case officers, ops personnel, and sigint operators who brought in the required data.
Chetan Murthy
@Carlo Graziani: The way I interpreted that little story-arc was:
The blame, I think, lies with the media, not with the IC.
Carlo Graziani
@Chetan Murthy: I don’t really agree. The point is that there are two conflicting meanings to that phrase. One meaning is a “meh!” consensus. The other is a raging, unresolvable intellectual conflict over the interpretation of extremely suggestive evidence. It is misleading to cover those two cases with the same anodyne “low confidence” label, and hence the press can be misled.
YY_Sima Qian
Great update Adam!
On the NordStream sabotage stories, I think the takeaway is we should all be careful when assessing intelligence assessments that are leaked to & then framed by the MSM, especially the low confidence ones. Not all reporting even have the integrity to note the confidence level of the intel assessment.
I remember when the sabotage 1st occurred many of us jumped to the conclusion that it was ordered by Putin to punish Germany. The same w/ the mysterious “Havana Syndrome”.
When low confidence intel assessment are leaked to the press, the more interesting questions to answer are who in the natsec apparatus did the leaking & what is their motivation for doing so, & not so much was the low confidence assessment says (because it is low confidence). If someone thought leaking this assessment to the press will “exonerate” the US or Ukraine in the sabotage, he/she has not thought it through. The assessment 1st & foremost “exonerates” Putin. People who want to believe that the CIA & Ukrainian intelligence are the culprits will simply believe that the pro-Ukrainian/anti-Putin group carried out the operation at the behest of the CIA/Ukrainian intelligence.
We are seeing a lot of these leaked intel reports recently. The leaked DOE assessment on the “lab leak” hypothesis for COVID-19 origin is one example, specified as low confidence but much of the subsequent commentary (not here) ignored that fact. The intelligence assessment that Russia was not behind the “Havana Syndrome” is another.
The Biden Administration itself publicized that it had intelligence (confidence level unknown) indicating that China is considering selling weapons & munitions to Russia, & has claimed that they have shared the intel w/ European allies & has been coordinating w/ them to pressure China away from that path. Yet, Ursula van der Leyen is saying in a press conference that they have not seen any evidence that Beijing is considering such a course of action, & we have Joseph Borrell & Olav Shultz claiming Xi (or Wang Yi) had told them that Beijing will not supply weapons to Russia (whatever that means & however much that is worth). We have also seen unnamed European officials quoted in European press saying U.S. intel on this matter is thin (we now know based on penetration into the Russian side) & were taken aback by how forcefully Blinken pressed the issue at the MSC. That might explain why only the US has been so forward leading on this topic.
The U.S. intelligence services gained a lot of credibility w/ the accurate information they gathered from sources in Russia & from other means pre-invasion, & how much was shared publicly in a bid to forestall the invasion. Still, we should not forget how much they have been wrong in the past, how damaging these mistakes proved to be, & how poor the MSM framing of leaked intel assessments can be.
YY_Sima Qian
@randy khan: Hahaha! I have had similar experience.
Armadillo
@Adam L Silverman: thank you again for your work in putting these updates together.
I am also a big fan of Oliver Alexander’s work and would definitely welcome seeing more content from him and other reliable OSINT folks. DefMon3 has good daily updates, although he sometimes makes impolite jokes about Mr. Putin.
Personally I have concerns about relying on Mr. Pfarrer for updates, particularly with respect to Bakhmut. Last week he was saying there was a major counteroffensive, which no other reliable sources reported. He’s still claiming the Kerch Bridge attack was ATACAMS. He obviously has significant military experience, but it’s not clear whether that experience is translating to accurate reports in the present day.
Jesse
@Armadillo: I also am puzzled by the ATACMS assessment for the Kerch bridge. I thought even our own Mr. Silverman assessed it that way, at the time? Maybe there was a correction, or walkbalk of some form, that I missed. But I seem to recall a headline here, shortly after the attack, to the effect that the attack was, presumably, ATACMS. (Not proof, just that it looks like it.)