(Image by NEIVANMADE)
I’ve seen the social media posts, basically RUMINT at this point, about Ukrainian maneuver elements in Operational Command South. I haven’t seen anything that I’m comfortable with that confirms what’s being posted. And that’s all I’ve got to say about that.
Here is President Zelenskyy’s address from earlier today. Video below, English transcript after the jump:
Our victory in this war will be shared by everyone who was bringing it closer – address by the President of Ukraine
23 April 2023 – 21:10
Good health to you, fellow Ukrainians!
Today I want to focus on words of gratitude.
First of all, to the warriors. To everyone who is currently in battle, in positions, on combat missions. Avdiivka, Maryinka, Bakhmut, Lyman direction, Siversk…
The 35th separate marine brigade named after Rear Admiral Ostrohradsky, the 55th separate artillery brigade “Zaporizka Sich”, the paratroopers of our “Seventy-ninth” – thank you, soldiers! Always brave and strong!
The 80th brigade of the airborne assault troops – thank you for the exemplary destruction of the enemy near Bakhmut. Well done, guys!
The 54th separate mechanized brigade named after Hetman Mazepa – thank you for your resilience, for defending the positions, and therefore for the defense of Ukraine!
It is important to understand that in each of our cities, in each village, wherever it is now more or less quiet. Everywhere where today was just a calm spring sunny day… Every day of such calmness in the rear areas is gained by our warriors in brutal battles on the frontline. In daily battles! Please, respect this. And always help our soldiers when needed, always support the state and defense as much as possible.
Second – gratitude to the rescuers, all our employees of the State Emergency Service, who are involved in eliminating the consequences of enemy strikes. Thanks to the entire team of the State Emergency Service! And our firefighters-rescuers should be singled out for their work this week – sergeant Roman Svitlychnyi, sergeant Petro Bondarenko, senior sergeant Oleksiy Inhulskyi, commander of the 5th state fire and rescue post, senior ensign Oleksandr Ivanenko, chief of the 13th fire and rescue unit of the city of Nemyriv major Vasyl Melnyk and Lieutenant Colonel Viktor Kuzmenko from the Main Directorate of the State Emergency Service in the Poltava region. Thank you!
Third – our psychologists. Today is the professional day of psychologists in our country, and I thank each and every one who chose this particular profession and dedicates their life and their time to the health and peace of mind of others. No matter where you work, no matter when you work, no matter under what conditions it happens, the purpose of a psychologist’s work is always noble – to help. I am thankful to those who help our people!
The fourth point. Since the 90s, the World Book and Copyright Day has been celebrated annually on April 23. Now, when millions of our people are in different countries, when Ukrainian children live and study in other linguistic and cultural environments, it seems to me that it is especially important that, through a Ukrainian book, the Ukrainian vision of the world unites our people, maintains a connection with home.
And I thank everyone who helps spread our book around the world. Who implements such projects as, for example, “Books without Borders”. In the difficult past year, more than 280,000 books were distributed in the framework of this project. 20 countries joined. Or our other project – Ukrainian bookshelves in almost 40 countries of the world. Thanks to everyone who helps! Thanks to all our Ukrainian publishers who continue their work. And, of course, I thank everyone who writes in Ukrainian and about Ukraine.
And, finally, the fifth. We continue to prepare several important international events that can give our state more strength and provide our soldiers with more weapons. Almost every day relevant communication with partners, relevant tasks for our diplomacy take place. Discussions, conversations, meetings.
And I thank everyone involved in such preparatory work. In the absolute majority of cases, this work is invisible to the general public. And rightly so. That’s how it works. The result is based on preparation. Thanks to everyone who prepares the results for Ukraine! The Office, the government, our diplomatic missions – thank you to everyone involved!
Our victory in this war will be shared by everyone who was bringing it closer. All those who fought and worked for victory. Glory to every Ukrainian hero! Glory to our beautiful people!
Glory to Ukraine!
When the theater commander shows up to hand out awards!
Picture of the day pic.twitter.com/zTDmlVxZ8m
— Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 (@IAPonomarenko) April 23, 2023
Bakhmut:
This was prior to it pic.twitter.com/KPektnxOlH
— NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 (@NOELreports) April 23, 2023
Destruction of Russian electronic warfare system Strizh, by the 128 Ukrainian Territorial Defense Battalion and Adam tactful group https://t.co/hhcFPsm66f pic.twitter.com/BCi37XDq6g
— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) April 23, 2023
I’m pretty sure that was supposed to be tactical, not tactful.
Kharkiv:
The cost of Ukrainian bread. Sappers barely have time to demine populated areas and main communications routes after the russian occupation.
Oleksandr Kryvtsun, a farmer from the Kharkiv region village of Hrakove, had to build his own tractor to demine his fields. pic.twitter.com/N6aZcXbUYV— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) April 23, 2023
5 missile strikes from Bedgorod on Kharkiv. All at industrial sites. We must not be mistaken – Russia will not abandon its goal to kill the Ukrainian economy. pic.twitter.com/fs45qMMu3b
— Maria Avdeeva (@maria_avdv) April 23, 2023
Zaporizhzhia:
For anyone that is asking when the counter offensive will start.
Trenches in Zaporizhzia oblast. pic.twitter.com/RBa2o5qcbg
— NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 (@NOELreports) April 23, 2023
Kyiv:
A Ukrainian serviceman sits by the fallen comrade's grave in the Alley of Heroes, Kyiv, 23 April 2023.
📸: EPA-EFE/OLEG PETRASYUK pic.twitter.com/ev1IfPyawJ
— UkraineWorld (@ukraine_world) April 23, 2023
I see that the PRC’s attempt to improve relations with EU member states is going well…
European governments have reacted with anger and dismay to comments by a Chinese diplomat questioning the legal status of former Soviet states and Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, who regained their independence from the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, have said they will summon Chinese diplomats on Monday to complain about the remarks by Lu Shaye, Beijing’s ambassador in Paris.
“These ex-Soviet Union countries do not have effective status under international law because there is no international accord to concretise their status as a sovereign country,” Lu Shaye said during an interview with French news channel LCI.
When asked whether Crimea was part of Ukraine, Lu said the question was “not simple to answer with a few words” and pointed out that Crimea used to belong to Russia, while neglecting to mention that Russia illegally annexed the peninsula in 2014.
Ukrainian officials dismissed the Chinese comments. “All post-Soviet Union countries have a clear sovereign status enshrined in international law,” tweeted Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak. “It is strange to hear an absurd version of the ‘history of Crimea’ from a representative of a country that is scrupulous about its thousand-year history.”
The French foreign ministry also expressed “dismay” over Lu’s comments.
“It is up to China to say whether these remarks reflect its position, which we hope they do not,” the French foreign ministry said. “We stand in solidarity with our allies and affected partners, who won long-awaited independence after decades of oppression.” It also added that the “annexation of Crimea . . . was illegal under international law”.
Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s foreign minister, said: “If anyone is still wondering why the Baltic states don’t trust China to ‘broker peace in Ukraine’, here’s a Chinese ambassador arguing that Crimea is Russian and our countries’ borders have no legal basis.”
Lu’s comments contradict China’s stated policy towards the former Soviet nations. China entered into diplomatic relations with these independent republics in September 1991.
“Lu Shaye has a radical, non-mainstream opinion which deviates from Beijing’s official position and practice,” said Moritz Rudolf, fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center.
Edgars Rinkēvičs, Latvia’s foreign minister, called the comments “completely unacceptable”, and added: “We expect explanation from the Chinese side and complete retraction of this statement.”
Beijing’s foreign ministry has not yet commented on Lu’s remarks. Lu, who is in the fourth year of his posting in Paris, has typified Beijing’s recent fashion of “wolf warrior” diplomacy — named after a set of films in which Chinese special-operations fighters defeat western-led mercenaries — with his previous outspoken remarks.
Vadym Omelchenko, Ukraine’s ambassador to France, quipped that Lu should be asked “who owns Vladivostok?”, referring to the port city that Russia annexed from China in the mid-19th century.
Margus Tsahkna, Estonia’s foreign minister, called the ambassador’s comments “false and a misinterpretation of history”. He added: “Baltic states under international law have been sovereign since 1918 but were occupied for 50 years.”
He seems nice…
This is what they’re fighting for:
Daddy! pic.twitter.com/RMbNaiK8yY
— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) April 23, 2023
And this:
I just want to let you know that there is a TikTok channel of a 🇺🇦 soldier dedicated entirely to a bull named Martyn. Martyn lost his owners due to the war and more than a year lived next to the positions of 🇺🇦 military. Recently, soldier decided to adopt Martyn and took him home pic.twitter.com/ikqLrEPpL0
— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) April 23, 2023
That’s enough for tonight.
Your daily Patron!
I have been living for about three days without a blue check. And I don't feel anything😅 I was glad to earn it, but I won't buy it. My people's wages are too hard to spend on verification. What do you think about this? pic.twitter.com/Bf0SScBxce
— Patron (@PatronDsns) April 23, 2023
Open thread!
Nukular Biskits
Always appreciate these, Adam.
Adam L Silverman
@Nukular Biskits: You’re most welcome.
Snarki, child of Loki
“a Chinese diplomat questioning the legal status of former Soviet states”
The correct response is “Good point! Now let’s eject Russia from the UN Security Council, since it isn’t the USSR.”
Mallard Filmore
YouTube has an interview with Malcolm Nance yesterday. He describes his time in the military, and his time in Ukraine. I thought it was inspiring.
link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCBddVKhrio
title: ” Malcolm Nance discusses the Russia-Ukraine situation & Tucker Carlson’s Russian propaganda”
Anonymous At Work
ISW seems sure that UA has an outpost across the Dnipro. Is the doubt that the sourcing is from complaining Russian mil-bloggers and no UA sources?
If true, what does an eastern and southern front do for UA chances to break out and a lot of territory?
Elizabelle
Love it. Even Patron is dissing Musk.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
Wait, I’m confused. If it’s not a mainstream opinion and deviates from Beijing’s official stated line, then how can it also be a “recent fashion” of Beijing’s? A shift in the PRC’s foreign policy?
Mallard Filmore
DailyKos has a posting that covers an interview with a retired Russian general thinks of this war. The lead-in for the interview is:
“In February 2022, when the war in Ukraine erupted, retired Russian Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov voiced his extreme misgivings. He claimed that the war would be very costly and far from a walkover. Furthermore, it would ensure Ukraine’s enmity towards Russia for the foreseeable future. He also argued that Russia’s preparation for the invasion had already solidified Western support for Ukraine. …”
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/23/2165499/-IF-Only-They-Had-Listened-to-Ivashov
https://www.memri.org/reports/retired-russian-colonel-general-ivashov-one-year-ago-i-warned-invading-ukraine-will-hurt
Anonymous At Work
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Gonna guess but chaos might make the West react first, giving China more information and options. Plus, I think Tucker Carlson et alia’s support for Russia has taught China to look for fellow travelers.
Jay
@Anonymous At Work:
As far as I am aware, various recon units are across the river and operating. The minimal Moscovite forces pulled back from the river.
Mallard Filmore
@Anonymous At Work:
This YouTuber has put out what he thinks, without diving into clickbait.
https://youtu.be/3ebDJ8Zukrc?t=108
So far the UA force is small but seems to be adequately established and supplied.
Chetan Murthy
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka):
Once upon a time, I remember when “invading Iraq is insane” was a mainstream position, pretty much supported by both parties, the State Department, etc. Then, well, a new Preznit and his keeper Darth Cheney came in, and they started pushing the envelope. They didn’t make much progress, until (lucky for them, unlucky for us and a lotta innocent Iraqis) Bin Laden decided to attack us. Darth and his puppet used that as a pretext to push the consensus toward “gotta attack Iraq”. Our allies and friends around the world thought we’d gone nuts (we had).
What I’m trying to say is: perhaps this guy Lu is part of a vanguard, pulling the window of expressible opinion in a more hawkish direction. Perhaps he’s doing it on his own, perhaps he’s doing it with the approval of his superiors (but if he fails, it’s deniable).
We do this stuff all the time, after all.
trollhattan
I have questions for the photographer re. their chosen spot from which to film this mine-clearing tank.
https://twitter.com/UkraineNewsLive/status/1650184055097262080?cxt=HHwWgICwofbp0OYtAAAA
Anonymous At Work
@Mallard Filmore: Not enough, now, to serve as a breakout point, but if UA can keep the Russian artillery from blowing up bridges, we could see more. That’s fairly open ground once you get away from the river. The goal really should be the nuclear power plant, resecure it and have a ton of UN inspectors there, if possible.
gene108
China doesn’t agree to the legitimacy any treaty signed prior to the communists taking power, which is one reason they have so many border disputes.
Now they want to up end the established order of former Soviet republics after 32 years, because of some absurd idea that there’s no formal treaty.
I guess some in China want to carry water for Russia for whatever reason.
wombat probabilty cloud
@trollhattan: Can you check the link? I’m getting stalled out. Thx.
Chetan Murthy
@gene108: I read someplace that this is an attempt to create (ahem) “facts on paper” that legitimize their forcible invasion of Taiwan. That is to say, if all these “formerly Soviet areas” aren’t legitimately sovereign countries, then gosh darnit, neither is Taiwan, amrite?!1!1!
Sigh.
Steeplejack
Well, they might well have been tactful in their destruction of the Strizh. Style points.
Chetan Murthy
@trollhattan: El Oh El. One presumes this was staged.
Ohio Mom
@Mallard Filmore: Very interesting interview. Leaves me wondering how someone so perceptive and knowledgeable could have dedicated his life to the USSR/Russia. Roots and loyalty I guess.
Mallard Filmore
@Ohio Mom: There are too many things about that i will never understand, so I am not one with answers.
Carlo Graziani
@Jay: I doubt that these could be referred to as “maneuver elements”, though.
That river of mud through a Zaprozhzhia trench is a pretty clear indication of the fact that no combined-arms assaults can be contemplated now. Weather forecasts suggest that drying-out can’t really be expected before week 2 of May, very optimistically.
The Russians have been idiots to keep up assaults throughout this warmish, damp winter, allowing mud to add a considerable multiplier to the usual advantages of prepared defenses over offensive forces. I doubt very much that the UA wishes to return the favor.
Another Scott
@Chetan Murthy: I have figured they would have to find a way to tie themselves in knots to keep up their mantra about “non-interference in internal affairs” while simultaneously not taking the West’s side in Ukraine. I mean, if “non-interference in internal affairs” really means anything as a bedrock principle, then invading a neighbor without provocation, illegally annexing territory, stealing children, destroying infrastructure, and on and on, seems to leave no wiggle-room on which side to support, amirite??
Grr…,
Scott.
Kent
Exactly. Russia is no older than Ukraine. They were both formed in their present incarnation around 1991.
Jay
@trollhattan:
AT mines are ususally not set off by a human walking on them or handling them. Which is why iyt is fairly common to set an AP mine underneath an AT mine, otherwise the UXO guys just pick up the AT mine, set the dentonator to safe, and reuse it.
The Pale Scot
Of course by that notion Russia is also an illegitimate State with no rights to sovereignty
Cameron
I don’t know what kind of trial balloon the Chinese ambassador is floating here. Doesn’t make much sense to me (not that it matters whether it makes sense to me).
Chetan Murthy
@Jay: Oh hm, I thought @trollhattan: was questioning the cameraman’s choice to film the demining machine from a position close to its actual operation …. that is to say, if there’d been a mine there, its explosion might have caught the cameraman.
Carlo Graziani
@Chetan Murthy: I don’t think this take really represents how the PRC Government views matters.
The messaging from Beijing has threaded the national sovereignty needle pretty consistently. On the one hand “non-interference” in affairs of sovereign nations is a keystone of CPC public justification for its international diplomacy, and in particular for its critique of US interventionism and interference. This is separate in their minds from any consideration affecting Taiwan, since Taiwan is part of China (and to be fair, Taiwan has never been officially recognized as a de jure sovereign nation, even by the US). Xi’s government has avoided subscribing to Putin’s denials of Ukrainian nationhood, while doing what it can to not undermine the Russian government.
Their support of Russia is pure self-interest, and limited by their national interests. The democratic rule-based order that largely assimilates Western democracies’ politics, diplomacy, and security strategies is viewed very inimically in Beijing—the implied political outlook alone is viewed as toxic and is utterly rejected by the CPC, which regards it as a facade covering US will to preserve dominance over the international order, and to effect a containment of China’s burgeoning power. Any enemy of this enemy is worth supporting, at least to the extent of maintaining it in being.
If this should require some fudging of clear categories of territorial sovereignty and its inviolability, so be it. But I think that Beijing cannot and does not regard such matters of national strategy as being linked to the issue of Taiwan.
Jay
@Carlo Graziani:
vid I saw earlier today, was a US Marine Platoon crossing the river in a small patrol boat. They then walked to a “base”, then headed out on a combat patrol.
The purpose of combat patrols is to get the lay of the land, find and survey enemy defences, observe and report, take prisoners, and just basically be a PITA in the enemy’s front.
What I have heard is that the Moscovites in this area have ceded the ground to the Ukrainian forces, because they are under strength and constantly harassed. All the Moscovite “mass” is eleswhere.
Jay
Duplicate comment
YY_Sima Qian
Even by “Wolf Warrior” standards, Lu has had a history of being a loose cannon, & this is not the 1st time he has produced a whopper on French TV (the last time was saying that the population of Taiwan needs to be “reeducated” after “reunification”).
Lu’s comments directly contravenes both official PRC policy & PRC practice. After all, the PRC formally recognizes & maintains diplomatic relations w/ all of the fUSSR, has signed treaties & agreements w/ all of them (including treaties that settled border disputes), PRC maps show these fUSSR states as independent nations, Chinese schoolchildren are taught that they are independent nations in world geography, & these nations marched under their sovereign flags in both the Beijing Summer & Winter Olympics.
If his comments actually reflected a Chinese foreign policy change, the more immediate consequences would be felt in Central Asia & even Russia. After all, the Russian Federation is also just a fUSSR state “w/o clear legal status”, in his formulation, & thus Russia has no business being on the UNSC.
Looking at his comments in context, I think he was trying to regurgitate a Russian talking point wrt Crimea, how it was “gifted” by Khrushchev to Ukraine during USSR, & thus not a sovereign act between the Russian Federation & Ukraine. However, Crimea was not disputed territory after 1991, the Russia Federation recognized it as Ukrainian territory, & that should be that.
I am not sure what drove Lu to say what he said. Whether he truly believed such nonsense & was willing to go against Chinese policy & practice in public, or whether he fumbled his French (in which case he has no business doing interviews in French if he could not communicate clearly). Whatever is the case, he not yet been censored by the Chinese Foreign Ministry for his past or current transgressions. I am certain his words do not reflect Chinese policy, but it is interesting to ponder why he has not be punished, & what that suggests about the quality of Chinese MFA operations under Xi.
China has historically loathed to make mea culpas, no matter how culpable, but Lu’s comments taken at face value has impact far beyond just the EU. We’ll see if Lu has finally strayed too far off the reservation.
Steeplejack
@Chetan Murthy:a
It’s staged for illustrative purposes. The demining tank is clearly going over a stretch that has already been cleared—the grass is flattened. Is it too much to assume that the photographer is standing on a similar cleared patch? I took trollhattan’s comment as (at least partially) humor.
Jay
@Chetan Murthy:
AT mines blow “up”, not out. So, at that distance, you are pretty safe, other than your eardrums.
I know mines are a boogy man for many people, but if you know what they are, and where they are, they are more a nuisiance than any thing else.
There are vids of a UA serviceperson clearing a Moscovite mined road by soccer kicking AT mines into the ditch, another clearing PM “Butterfly” mines with a long handled shovel.
Anoniminous
@Jay: Kicking mines into a ditch or fiddle-farting around with a shovel are excellent ways to die. Mines have anti-tamper fuses that should be activated when the mine is laid.
Jay
@Steeplejack:
one of the AT/AV mines we used, had a counter. You could set it so the first vehicle that drove over it blew up, or the 10th vehicle that drove over it blew up, or any number in between.
Now of course, there are “smart” “off path” mines. They can be set up 30 meters away from “the path”, dentonate on soil vibrations, sound or magnetics, or a combo, fire a shaped charge, some even have “top attack” capability.
Jay
@Anoniminous:
most anti tamper features on AT mines are based on trying to remove or reset the dentonator. They arn’t often used, as you set a minefield in front of your positions, win an advance, now what do you do?
Neutralize the mines, move them forward and reset them, or have a narrow route in your rear, because “mine field”?
Jay
@Anoniminous:
PM Butterfly mines are designed to wound, not kill. They are the ones that look to kids like toys, and are “scatterable”.
If you pick them up with a shovel with a 6 foot handle, even if they go off, and you are wearing hearing protection, you are fine.
Standard procedure is to dig a hole,(2 to 3 feet deep) shovel the mines into the hole, set a detcord on top, cover the hole with dirt and blow the charge.
Because they are small, are plastic and look like a toy, they are brutal to people who are unaware.
Anoniminous
@Jay:
Depends on the Operational and/or tactical situation and so the purpose of the minefield. Sometimes there’s no intention of lifting the mines. Sometimes mines as used to channel an attacker into a kill zone which can then be used as your own attack lane. Or lay the minefield out in such a manner that there are known, mapped, attack lane(s) through the mines. Or create a solid barrier with the intent of using your own mine-clearing equipment to blast a path. Or anti-handling devices are used to prevent the VC from sneaking-up and pointing your Claymores at your own position.
Anoniminous
@Jay:
Recommendation for removing PM1s is a 3 meter long “scoop” made of plastic so when one of the things goes “boom” you don’t have metal fragments flying around.
Jay
@Anoniminous:
Claymores are command dentonated. They arn’t really a “mine” in many regards.
Most of that anti-tamper features of AT mines are not used, as your own people can’t clear their own mine fields.
That’s why AP mines are often used, but you have to have balls to lay them, as most work on a double click feature. Stepping on the mine sets the dentonator, stepping off the mine, triggers the explosion. So you bury the AP mine, press the AT mine down on top until you hear the click, then bury the whole mess, hopefully, with out lightening the load enough that the AT mine goes off. There are pins that can be used, (click, set pin< emplace, put the weight on top, AT mine), bury,pull the pin with a string).
Vid came out today of a UA soldier using an AT mine as a frisbee, to take out a Rachidist bunker.
Jay
@Anoniminous:
Plastic is sort of best, but still, if the PM goes off, chunks are flying. A good steel shovel is fine, less chance of stuff breaking off, as the PM is designed to shred feet or hands, not actually kill people.
Yutsano
@YY_Sima Qian: I mean…I really don’t see how the PRC government doesn’t respond here. A bunch of ambassadors are getting their butts hauled into state ministries all over Europe (and probably Central Asia although we’ll hear less about that in the US) to get some serious splainin to do. I hope beyond hope this isn’t a trial balloon for a new policy, because it’s already gone over like an oak tree in a bad storm.
YY_Sima Qian
@gene108:
@Chetan Murthy:
The PRC inherited the territorial disputes from the ROC, which refused to recognized the legitimacy of the unequal treaties the Qing Empire was forced to sign under duress w/ the various imperial powers, as a matter of nationalist principle widely held across the political spectrum since these treaties were signed.
The PRC, shortly after its founding, ended up recognizing the independence of Mongolia (in essence a Soviet satellite state) & the seizure of Outer Manchuria by the Russian Empire, in order to establish an alliance w/ the USSR. The PRC also recognized the border regions ceded by the Qing Empire to Myanmar, back when it was still part of the British India, in the interest of Non-Aligned Movement solidarity.
The PRC had disputes w/ the USSR for a few slices of land/islets along their borders in Manchuria & Xinjiang, which precipitated bloody border skirmishes as the two fell out in the late 50s & early 60s. The border disputes were finally resolved in the late 90s to early 00s. In fact, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was born out of the multilateral mechanism between China, Russia & the Central Asia Republics that border China to resolve the disputes & reduce the tensions along their borders. I don’t think the PRC had border dispute w/ Vietnam at its founding. However, it created one in 1979, after the very costly punitive campaign into the latter, as the PRC retained control over several hilltops that dominated the border terrain following withdrawal from Vietnam. The two sides fought a series of bloody border clashes throughout the 80s for these hilltops. The dispute was settled in the late 90s & early 00s. Right now, the only land disputes the PRC still has is w/ India & Bhutan. If you look at an official ROC map, however, all of those territories ceded via unequal treaties are still colored as Chinese.
The PRC has maritime disputes w/ South Korea (over a small island in the Yellow Sea), Japan (over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands), & Vietnam/the Philippines/Malaysia/Indonesia (over the South China Sea). These were all inherited from the ROC.
Both the ROC & the PRC have maintained that the Treaty of Shimonoseki, which ceded Taiwan & the Penghu Islands to Imperial Japan, was illegitimate, ditto w/ the Treaty of Nanking that ceded Hong Kong to the British Empire. This is why Chiang Kai-Shek insisted that Taiwan be returned to China at the end of WW II, even though the US thought about giving Taiwan independence. If the US had done the latter, I don’t think the ROC would have been in a position to resist the outcome. The blow to KMT legitimacy might have made Chiang lose the civil war even faster, but the PRC may well have had to recognize Taiwan’s de jure independence if the US was willing to guarantee it. There would have been no place for Chiang to flee to, & no reason for the US & the most of the West to in insist on recognizing Taipei as the sole legitimate government representing all of China for nearly 3 decades.
Likewise, the US could have given the Ryukyus independence following WW II, as opposed to keeping it in Japan. It could have given the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands to Taiwan in the early 70s (when it still only recognized Taipei), as opposed to giving it to Japan to administer (but the US did/does not officially recognizing Japanese sovereignty over the islands). Had it done the former, the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands would not be a flash point today.
China has never needed convoluted legal reasoning to assert its claim over Taiwan, Lu’s comments would only serve to muddy the waters. As far as the PRC is concerned, Taiwan was returned to China (then the ROC) in 1945, what happened after is an unfinished but frozen civil war prolonged by direct US intervention, & the PRC has unquestioned de jure sovereignty over Taiwan. That would be the One China Principle that the PRC tries to make every country subscribe to in order to establish diplomatic relations. The US & most of the West, however, insisted on the formulation of One China Policy during their normalization of relations w/ the PRC, which states that they acknowledge both sides of the Taiwan Strait believe they belong to one China, that the PRC claims de jure sovereignty over Taiwan, some go as far as stating that they will not challenge the PRC’s position, but they do not explicitly agree w/ the PRC’s stance. Since the PRC desperately wanted to emerge from its isolation in the 70s, it pretended that the One China Policy did not exist, normalized relations w/ the West anyway, & continued to assert the One China Principle.
The reasons that situation across the Taiwan Strait is increasingly precarious are multifold: 1. Taiwan is now a democracy, popular opinion is now important, a large majority do not believe they belong in even a notional One China w/ the Mainland, & the overwhelming majority has no interest in any sort of “reunification” (most certainly not while the CCP regime rules the Mainland); 2. the military balance across the Strait is now lopsided in the PRC’s favor, while the military balance w/in the 1st Island Chain is also tilting the PRC’s favor away from the US & Japan; 3. the US & the West in general want to help Taiwan to assert its de facto independence, in face of the changing military & economic balance in the region, which the PRC fears are prelude toward de jure independence; 4. the PRC is moving aggressively to reduce Taiwan’s space to assert its de facto independence internationally, which much of the West fears is prelude to a coercive effort to absorb Taiwan; 5. there are elements of the US natsec crowd that are not shy about using Taiwan as a pawn in Great Power Competition w/ China, which plays to nationalist passions/paranoia w/in the PRC.
Nothing Lu said is helpful in anything that Xi or the PRC is trying to accomplish. Like I said, we shall see if he has finally strayed too far off the reservation.
YY_Sima Qian
@Yutsano: Some sort of clarification from the Chinese MFA would be helpful, but probably will not happen. Chinese diplomacy (the PRC, the ROC, & the Qing) has historically been very thin skinned toward criticism (legitimate or not) & w/ embarassment. What will probably happen is that China will stay mum, possibly recall Lu from France after a “decent” interval, & hope everyone forgets the brouhaha. As long as no other Chinese diplomat echo the nonsense.
It may well happen, since Lu’s assertions are so at odds w/ decades of Chinese commitments, policy & practice, & there is nothing other than Lu’s comments to suggest a change. Such policy change would fatally undermine China’s foreign policy aims throughout Eurasia, including its entente w/ Russia (if no fUSSR state has legitimacy, then the settled borders between the PRC & the Russian Federation suddenly become unsettled). There is no precedence of Chinese ambassadors sending up policy trial balloons (& doing so in a foreign language interview w/ foreign media to boot), that is not how Chinese diplomacy or policymaking works in general.
Like I said, I think Lu was trying to regurgitate Russia propaganda wrt Crimea, which is bad enough, & did so w/ extraordinary clumsiness, w/o thinking through the larger implications. That he has remained China’s ambassador to France (a not unimportant country), despite numerous past transgressions while posted there, does suggest that the Chinese MFA has significant issues operationally.
YY_Sima Qian
@Carlo Graziani: If I had read your post before I wrote mine, I would not have written them. I think you have it exactly right wrt Chinese balancing act on Ukraine.
Jay
@YY_Sima Qian:
so glad to see you back,…
YY_Sima Qian
The Chinese MFA spokesperson has already walked back Lu’s nonsensical comments in today’s daily briefing, stating that China has always recognized the fUSSR states as sovereign independent states (since all of them are UN members & have formal diplomatic relations w/ China), and that China’s position on Crimea has not changed (China does not recognize any of Putin’s annexations in Georgia & Ukraine).
TerryC
@Jay: When I was at the Defense Special Projects Research Group while in the Navy in the early 1970s we were among other things developing scatter/butterfly mines that looked like dog poop.
Weekend Editor
The Ukrainian MoD has been releasing daily estimates of Russian casualties on Twitter.
I took the last 90 days or so worth of data, and built some regression models comparing loss rates of soldiers, jets, helicopters, tanks, and so on as well as looking at those vs time. Most of them were far more correlated than I thought they’d be, and far smoother.
Using a soldiers vs time regression, the model predicts 200k Russian soliders lost on or about 2023-May-05.
Here’s an earlier, much cruder, look at rates of tank losses. It’s a crude estimate since I still have some post-COVID-19 brain fog, but it seems about 9 months before the Russians run out of tanks. (Depending on what you believe about how many tanks they have in storage, how many of those actually work, whether they can train new tank crews fast enough to use them, and so on.)