Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The fundamental promise of conservatism all over the world is a return to an idealized past that never existed.

Republicans in disarray!

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

So many bastards, so little time.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

I’m starting to think Jesus may have made a mistake saving people with no questions asked.

Spilling the end game before they can coat it in frankl luntz-approved dogwhistles.

Their boy Ron is an empty plastic cup that will never know pudding.

“Loving your country does not mean lying about it’s history.”

Republicans: “Abortion is murder but you can take a bus to get one.” Easy peasy.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Russia bombs Ukraine’s maternity hospitals; Republicans in the House can’t sort out supporting Ukraine.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

We are aware of all internet traditions.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you don’t.

Since we are repeating ourselves, let me just say fuck that.

The most dangerous place for a black man in America is in a white man’s imagination.

Republicans got rid of McCarthy. Democrats chose not to save him.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

How any woman could possibly vote for this smug smarmy piece of misogynistic crap is beyond understanding.

… gradually, and then suddenly.

It could be worse. Vance could have said “post-menopausal sows.” Waiting for that audiotape to surface.

If you voted for Trump, you don’t get to speak about ethics, morals, or rule of law.

You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / War for Ukraine Day 793: Russia Continues Its Bombardment of Ukraine

War for Ukraine Day 793: Russia Continues Its Bombardment of Ukraine

by | 87 Comments

This post is in: , , , , , , ,

(Image by NEIVANMADE)

Russia continues to bombard Ukrainian civilian targets ahead of the arrival of the newly announced US military aid.

Here is President Zelenskyy’s address from earlier today. Video below, English transcript after the jump.

I Am Grateful to All the Countries That Have Recently Adopted New Decisions on Aid for Ukraine – Address by the President

25 April 2024 – 20:24

I wish you health, fellow Ukrainians!

The key points for today.

The Staff meeting. Complex issues of protection, not only of the energy sector, but of the entire vital infrastructure. Social facilities, communications, everything that sustains normal life in cities and communities. Air defense, electronic warfare, necessary engineering solutions and construction. I am grateful to all those who are already working promptly at their level – both in the government and in the regions. It is very important that the deadlines for implementing decisions are met. In particular, we are closely monitoring this at the Staff meetings. We are also working on contracts for the production of weapons and equipment in Ukraine. Each manufacturer must have a truly long-term assurance that each contract will be backed by the necessary finance, supply, and logistics. We are also working with our partners to invest in production in Ukraine – in some areas we can already produce much more than our funds can cover. In particular, during our visits, during negotiations, in contacts between government officials and partners, we discuss the possibility of raising funds on a larger scale so that countries that have the funds but do not have their own production facilities can build their arsenal together with us and help our frontline. I thank everyone who has shown their interest and is contributing to this cooperation. And, of course, the situation at the front. We are preparing for tomorrow’s Ramstein meeting and will discuss, among other things, how to overcome the difficulties and problems that have accumulated over the past six months while we have been waiting for decisions on American support. Politically, we have already achieved the support. Now we need to work on filling the packages with the necessary weapons and ensuring logistics. I am grateful to all the countries that have recently adopted new decisions on aid for Ukraine, our warriors, our cities and communities. I am grateful to everyone who helps!

And today I continue to work as actively as possible on the American direction. I have already spoken with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. I thanked him for his leadership, which has now guaranteed that democracy in the world will not lose ground. I also spoke with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. I thanked them for their integrity and support in the fight against terror. I will also speak with House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries. The focus of all our conversations is our common strength – shared among all who value human life and strive to preserve our way of life that unites us within the Euro-Atlantic community. We talked about “Patriots,” about the strength of our arsenals, about our political cooperation. We can defeat Russian terror. We have to do it. I thank everyone who fights and works for our strength, for our Ukraine! I thank everyone who helps!

Glory to Ukraine!

The cost:

Denmark:

⚡️Denmark announces additional $633 million in military support to Ukraine.

The Danish parliament agreed to add 4.4 billion Danish kroner ($633 million) in military support to the country’s Ukraine Fund in 2024, the Danish Foreign Ministry announced on April 25.

https://kyivindependent.com/denmark-announces-633-million-military-support-to-ukraine/

Finland and Sweden:

France:

“If we say that Ukraine is a condition for our security, that what is at stake in Ukraine is not just the country’s territorial integrity but the security of Europeans, do we have any limits? No” – President Macron.

Other key points from @EmmanuelMacron‘ speech today:

🔷”The sine qua non for our security is that Russia does not win the war of aggression it is waging in Ukraine.”

🔷He explained that it is necessary to give substance to the reliable defense of the European continent:

“Does that mean we need a missile shield? Perhaps. Is it by increasing our defense capabilities, and if so, how? Undoubtedly. This is why, in the coming months, I will be inviting all our partners to build this European defense initiative,” Emmanuel Macron stressed.

EU member states:

From Yahoo!News:

BRUSSELS (AP) — European Union countries possessing Patriot air defense systems gave no clear signal on Monday whether they might be willing to supply them to Ukraine, which is desperately seeking at least seven of the missile batteries to help fend off Russian air attacks.

Russia’s air force is vastly more powerful than Ukraine’s, but sophisticated missile systems provided by Kyiv’s Western partners can pose a major threat as the Kremlin’s forces slowly push forward along the roughly 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line in the war.

Only Germany has come forward with a single Patriot missile battery in answer to Ukraine’s latest request.

At a meeting of EU foreign and defense ministers, Dutch Foreign Minister Hanke Bruins Slot said the Netherlands is “looking at every kind of possibility at the moment” and is offering financial support to a German initiative to help Ukraine bolster its air defenses and to buy more drones.

Asked why the Netherlands is reluctant to send some of its Patriot systems, Slot said: “We are looking again if we can deplete our store of what we still have, but that will be difficult.”

Last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that the military organization “has mapped out existing capabilities across the alliance and there are systems that can be made available to Ukraine.” He did not name the countries that possess Patriots.

A key advantage of the U.S.-made systems, apart from their effectiveness, is that Ukrainian troops are already trained to use them.

But Patriots take a long time to make — as long as two years, some estimates suggest — so countries are reluctant to give them up and leave themselves exposed. Germany had 12, but it is now supplying three to Ukraine. Poland, which borders Ukraine, has two and needs them for its own defenses.

Asked whether his country would provide any, Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson said: “I don’t exclude that possibility, but right now we’re focused on financial contributions.” He said Sweden would send other systems that could “relieve some of the pressure” on the need for Patriots.

Jonson also noted that more U.S. deliveries of air defense systems might come after the U.S. House of Representatives passed a package over the weekend of $61 billion in support, including $13.8 billion for Ukraine to buy weapons.

Questioned about whether Spain might step up with Patriots, Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said that his country “will make its decisions based on the power it has in its hands to support Ukraine.”

“I don’t think we’re helping anyone if we hear all the time what it is that’s being given, when it’s being given and how it’s getting in,” he said at the meeting in Luxembourg.

Reporters repeatedly asked EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, who chaired the talks, why countries appear so reluctant to step forward. Many in Europe feel that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not stop at invading Ukraine should he win the war there.

Borrell said that the EU itself does not own Patriot missile systems. “The Patriots are in the capitals, and it’s up to them to take the decisions,” he said. “Now everything has been said, and a lot of things have to be done.”

NATO keeps track of the stocks of weapons held by its 32 member countries to ensure that they are able to execute the organization’s defense plans in times of need.

But Stoltenberg said on Friday that if dropping below the guidelines is “the only way NATO allies are able to provide Ukraine with the weapons they need to defend themself, well, that’s a risk we have to take.”

Beyond providing new Patriot batteries, Stoltenberg said that it’s also important for countries to ensure that the batteries they do send are well maintained and have spare parts and plenty of interceptor missiles.

In a separate development at Monday’s meeting, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis expressed concern about possible Russian sabotage against facilities in Europe being used to train Ukrainian troops.

Two German-Russian men were arrested in Germany last week on suspicion of espionage, one of them accused of agreeing to carry out attacks on potential targets including U.S. military facilities, prosecutors said. The U.S. has a number of military bases in Germany.

“We are witnessing very similar events in our region, not just in Lithuania but also in Latvia and Estonia as well,” Landsbergis told reporters.

“There seems to be a coordinated action against the European countries that is coming from Russia,” he said. “We have to find a way to deal with the threat … because Russia is fighting not just against Ukraine but the West as well.”

The effects of American delay:

Ambassador (ret) Fried at The Atlantic Council:

Finally, the blockage imposed by a minority of “America First” House members has been broken and, after a six-month delay, crucial US military aid may be on its way to Ukraine again. An alliance of what might be termed Reaganite Republicans and Trumanesque Democrats—a coalition that helped bring success in the Cold War and after—passed a $60.8 billion assistance package for Ukraine in 311-112 vote on Saturday. Rapid acceptance by the Senate and signature by US President Joe Biden look likely to follow in short order. The Biden administration appears poised to push ahead fast with sending new weapons to Ukraine.

The House vote stops the hemorrhage of US credibility that had thrown US allies into varying degrees of alarm and demoralized Ukrainians, who are fighting for their lives. Meeting with me and US colleagues in Kyiv in late March, a senior Ukrainian government official asked rhetorically what had become of the United States on which Ukraine has pinned its hopes for survival and freedom. Katarzyna Pisarska, head of the Casimir Pulaski Foundation and one of Poland’s most effective foreign policy experts, who led a group of Polish, German, and French parliamentarians to Washington in the days before the vote, put it bluntly: “We believe in America. Watching the paralysis in the face of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s aggression shook us all. Passage of the assistance restores our faith.”

“Ukraine has not yet perished” are the opening words of the Ukrainian national anthem. They remain true. The Biden administration should take the successful vote on US assistance to Ukraine as an opportunity to reverse the perception, advanced by Kremlin propagandists and their friends, that Ukraine is doomed. In fact, with sufficient European and US support, Ukraine has a plausible path to success in the war.

As US government officials put it, with enough shells (especially from the multination initiative led by the Czech Republic) the Ukrainian military could blunt an expected Russian land offensive. With sufficient new air-defense systems (including from a German-led effort), the Ukrainians could limit the damage Russian strikes do to their infrastructure and cities. Using long-range weapons, Ukraine could further degrade Russian bases, supply lines, and even its hold on Crimea. An intensified flow of US weapons, including the longer-range Army Tactical Missile System (or ATACMS), which the House bill presses for by name, could shift battlefield fortunes. The Biden administration should set aside its ill-considered opposition to Ukrainian strikes on legitimate targets inside Russia. With more and better weapons and fewer restrictions, Russian casualties and damage could mount and opposition to the war, latent but evident inside Russia, could grow.

A surge of weapons to Ukraine needs to be accompanied by an uptick in sanctions on Russia. The US- and European-led sanctions effort was effective in the first year of the full Russian invasion but needs to be intensified to close loopholes and go after third countries and companies that help Russia evade sanctions. The Group of Seven (G7) debate about using the roughly $300 billion of immobilized Russian sovereign assets held in Western financial institutions to help Ukraine has only crawled forward, at a pace not commensurate with the stakes. The legal case for using those assets to help Ukraine appears solid. The G7 Summit this coming June should be a moment for action, not further discussion.

If the United States and its allies surge ahead in military support for Ukraine and new economic pressure on Russia, by the time of the July NATO Summit in Washington Ukraine’s battlefield fortunes could be better and Russia on the defensive militarily and economically. The Biden administration appears intent on using that summit to lock in robust security support to Ukraine through a series of parallel agreements by European allies and the United States, a sort of bridge to ultimate NATO membership, as administration officials privately put it. The metaphor is apt: A credible bridge from Ukraine’s wartime trial to the long-term security of NATO membership—an end state that NATO has already agreed on—would be a major success and a marked setback for Putin.

But that’s a best-case scenario. The six-month delay in the assistance package caused by a determined isolationist minority in the House has cost Ukraine many lives and much damage. Numerous reports describe a deteriorating military situation on the front lines and Russian preparations for a major land offensive. The memory of the United States dithering while Ukraine literally burned, and the arguments of the America Firsters that effectively signaled that Ukraine was unimportant and should be left to Russia, will linger.

More at the link.

The Biden administration is of two minds. Politico has the details on both.

Mind #1:

The U.S. is putting the finishing touches on one of its largest Ukraine military aid packages to date, preparing to ink contracts for as much as $6 billion worth of weapons and equipment for Kyiv’s forces, according to two U.S. officials.

The package, which could be finalized and announced as soon as Friday, will dip into the $61 billion in Ukraine funding signed into law by President Joe Biden on Wednesday. It would include Patriot air defense munitions, artillery ammunition, drones, counter-drone weapons, and air-to-air missiles to be fitted on fighter planes, according to the two officials and a third person familiar with the planning.

The equipment — which also includes ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems — likely won’t arrive in Ukraine for several years, as the money is being allocated under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. Under USAI, the Pentagon issues contracts to American defense firms to build new equipment for Ukraine, as opposed to drawing from current U.S. stocks.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is expected to announce the new aid during a virtual meeting on Friday of the 50-plus nations that make up the Ukraine Defense Contact Group. It will be a big boost after the U.S. was forced to show up empty-handed for the monthly gathering for months while the funding was stalled in Congress.

The package, which comes on top of the $1 billion in more immediate aid announced by Washington on Wednesday, comes as Kyiv is being outgunned and outmanned by Russian forces as the Russian war industry is running at full capacity.

Asked for comment, Pentagon spokesperson Lt. Col. Garron Garn said the department had no security assistance announcements to make. The people familiar with the pending announcement were granted anonymity to discuss internal planning.

Moscow has been firing as many as 10 artillery rounds for every Ukrainian round fired, as Kyiv’s stockpiles dwindled.

“The Russians are going to … three shifts a day 24/7” in their defense industry, the Pentagon’s acquisition chief, William LaPlante, said on Wednesday. “Depending on who you believe, they’re at 6 to 7 percent of their GDP is spent on their military, we’re at about 3.2 percent.”

But after the $1 billion drawdown package announced on Wednesday, “Literally right now there are planes flying probably with equipment to Ukraine,” he added. “All we need is to sign the bill and we’re gone. We’re writing contracts this afternoon.”

That drawdown of artillery rounds, air defense missiles, armored vehicles and Army Tactical Missile Systems with a range of nearly 200 miles represents more immediate help for Ukraine as it tries to blunt recent Russian advances and stepped-up missile attacks on Ukrainian critical infrastructure.

Mind #2:

Despite the time and political capital spent on the $60 billion aid for Ukraine, some Biden administration officials are skeptical it’s enough for Ukraine to win its two-year war with Russia.

Battlefield dynamics have shifted a lot in the last few months, partly because Ukraine ran low on weaponry and ammunition while Congress debated authorizing more aid, according to three U.S. officials, all granted anonymity to detail sensitive internal thinking. During that period, Ukraine struggled to maintain eastern territory, though Russia didn’t make significant gains, either.

Russia maintains a manpower and weapons advantage, and it would take a lot to reverse months and years of territorial losses. U.S. officials also ask questions about Ukraine’s own tactics and priorities, especially after Kyiv’s counteroffensive failed, sapping forces of materiel and morale.

“The immediate goal is to stop Ukrainian losses and help Ukraine regain momentum and turn the tide on the battlefield. After that, the goal is to help Ukraine begin to regain its territory,” said one of the officials. “Will they have what they need to win? Ultimately, yes. But it’s not a guarantee that they will. Military operations are much more complicated than that.”

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers are also expressing concerns about whether more U.S.-provided weapons can lead to a Ukrainian defeat of Russia or if it’s just enough to temporarily fend off the invasion. “That’s the question,” said a senior Democratic Senate aide.

The answer matters greatly. Winning against Russia means Ukraine will get most or all of its territory back after 10 years of war, the last two featuring Vladimir Putin’s all-out assault. Not losing, by contrast, signals Ukraine can hold its lines and advance some but fail to claw back what Russia seized.

Biden, upon signing the aid package for Ukraine on Wednesday, stressed that Russia uses its military to target civilian infrastructure, highlighting the need to boost Kyiv’s firepower. They’ve killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians,” Biden said, “bombed hospitals … kindergartens, grain silos, tried to plunge Ukraine into a cold dark winter.”

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby hinted Tuesday that Ukraine still doesn’t have a fully formed plan to defeat Russia, though the U.S. would be in talks to help crystalize one. “We’ll be able to continue to have conversations with the Ukrainians about what their longer-term strategy is for pushing back Russian aggression and then tailoring the [future] packages to meet those needs,” he told reporters aboard Air Force One.

The Biden administration has long maintained Kyiv will decide how the war will end, whether by pushing Russian forces back across the border or a favorable deal at the bargaining table. But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy insists his nation must fight until the Crimean peninsula, the eastern Donbas territory and other parts of the country are back under his control. Whether posturing or not, that stance commits the United States to a much longer conflict with no guarantee Zelenskyy will achieve his goals.

“There’s lots of debate about what a winning endgame for Ukraine looks like at this point,” said the senior Democratic Senate staffer.

The Biden administration laments that months of congressional deliberation deprived Ukraine of weaponry to push back on Russia, placing it on the backfoot during crucial months of war. “It is certainly possible that Russia could make additional tactical gains in the coming weeks,” Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, said Wednesday. “It’s going to take some time for us to dig out of the hole that was created by six months of delay.”

Biden administration officials expect the $60 billion will last at least through the end of this presidential term. Should Biden win reelection against former President Donald Trump, it’s unclear if he would need to ask Congress — which could see Republicans lead both the Senate and House — for another authorization.

The only reason these are not the worst senior national security professionals I’ve ever seen is because I lived through both the Bush 43 and Trump administrations.

As always, the enemy gets a vote. Due to the risk aversion of Biden’s senior national security appointees, he also gets a seat at the deliberation table and a veto.

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1783520300274987273

Here are the details from The Economist: (emphasis mine)

Since late February Russia’s army has been creeping across eastern Ukraine. First the town of Avdiivka fell—Russia’s biggest advance in almost a year. Next its soldiers occupied a series of villages farther west. Russia’s progress is a reflection of its overwhelming advantage in firepower: on some parts of the front line, for every shell the Ukrainians have shot at Russian lines, the Russians have rained down 17 in response. Ukrainian forces have been rationing ammunition, for fear of running out. That scarcity, in turn, was a reflection of America’s failure to approve any new military aid for Ukraine since last summer.

This week, however, after months of dithering, Congress approved $40bn of such assistance, a sum roughly equivalent to all America’s military aid to Ukraine since the war began. (There was also some humanitarian aid and help for Israel and Taiwan) Joe Biden, America’s president, signed the bill into law on April 24th and ordered the immediate dispatch of the first $1bn of supplies, to arrive in days.

It comes just in time. In March Emmanuel Macron warned the heads of French political parties that Russia might break through Ukrainian lines and advance towards Kharkiv or Odessa. On April 18th Bill Burns, the director of the CIA, warned that Ukraine would be in a “dire” position if Congress did not approve the aid package. “There is a very real risk that the Ukrainians could lose on the battlefield by the end of 2024, or at least put Putin in a position where he could essentially dictate the terms of a political settlement.”

Such a calamity has now been averted. With the assistance Congress has approved, Mr Burns has said that Ukrainian forces should be able to “hold their own” on the battlefield this year and dispel the “arrogant view” of Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, “that time is on his side”. The new aid should include around a year’s worth of shells, reckons Michael Kofman of the Carnegie Endowment, a think-tank.

But the imbalance in firepower of recent months has already had grim consequences. Russia’s advantage in artillery has provided cover for its troops to advance. Worse, it has forced Ukraine to repel assaults using infantry armed with grenades and small arms, rather than its own artillery. This has led to more Ukrainian casualties and fewer Russian ones than would otherwise have been the case (though Russian losses are still appallingly high: about 1,000 killed and wounded a day during offensives, Western officials reckon).

What is more, even the fresh infusion of weaponry will not wholly eliminate Russia’s advantage in terms of firepower. With its huge population and oil wealth, Russia also finds it easier to drum up new recruits. Ukraine is therefore likely to remain on the back foot, unable to mount new offensives. And uncertainty about Western aid will not go away: America may become much less friendly to Ukraine after presidential and congressional elections in November.

The fiercest fighting at the moment is in Chasiv Yar, a town just to the west of Bakhmut, the city Russia captured a year ago after nine months of trying. For Russia, seizing Chasiv Yar would open a path towards bigger cities in Donetsk province. Donetsk and neighbouring Luhansk (almost all of which is already in Russian hands) form the Donbas region, which Russia has annexed in theory and would like to do so in practice (see map). For Ukraine, Chasiv Yar is a strategic stronghold, on high ground and shielded by a canal, trenches and other recently strengthened fortifications. Russian forces have reportedly been ordered to advance as far as they can before May 9th, Victory Day, which commemorates the end of the second world war and is an occasion for bombastic military parades and jingoistic speeches.

Colonel Pavlo Fedosenko, who leads a brigade defending the city, says Ukrainian forces maintain a substantial degree of control there. During the past month of all-out fighting, Russia has shown it “lacks the strength and means” to advance. In the meantime, Ukraine has inflicted serious losses, destroying around 100 armoured vehicles in a month in this section of the front alone. Now, he says, the Russians are “largely attacking on off-road motorcycles, buggies and quad bikes”. Surveillance drones allow Ukrainian forces to detect movement as much as 10km away and react promptly. But Russian attack drones torment Ukrainian forces: stay at any point in the city for more than a few minutes and they begin to rain down. Although news of the new aid package was greeted with cheers in the local command room, Colonel Fedosenko says, he and others suspect Chasiv Yar will fall eventually.

The infusion of arms should, however, put Ukraine in a stronger position to fend off a bigger Russian offensive that Kyrylo Budanov, the head of Ukraine’s military-intelligence service, has said he expects in May. Ukrainian forces predict a push in the east to capture more of Donbas. They have also noticed an increase in Russian reconnaissance farther north, around Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second city. Capturing such an important place would be a huge psychological victory, but Russia almost certainly lacks both the troops and sufficient mechanised vehicles for a decisive attack.

Defending Ukraine’s skies will also be hard. Russia has hammered Ukraine’s defence industry and power grid with barrages of drones and missiles. Ukraine tries to defend against these assaults with a hotch-potch of American, European and Soviet-era anti-missile systems. But as with its artillery, its stock of ammunition has dwindled. Videos published on social media in recent weeks show Russian Su-25 jets flying at relatively low altitudes in the east, providing close support to troops. Russian reconnaissance drones have also penetrated as far as 40km behind the front lines without being shot down. Such incidents suggest that Ukraine is running short of interceptor missiles.

The erosion of Ukraine’s air defence has several malign effects. On the front lines, the shortage of interceptor missiles has given more freedom of manoeuvre to Russian jets and guided aerial bombs, which have been flying in at a rate of 100-130 a day. The worst-case scenario is that Russia achieves air superiority, allowing it to bomb the front lines at will, as it did in the city of Mariupol in the first months of the war. That would make it vastly harder for Ukraine to hold its current lines.

There is also the damage to infrastructure away from the front. On April 16th a Ukrainian official said that Russia had destroyed seven gigawatts (GW) of power-generation capacity in previous weeks, leaving just 10GW or so operational. Ukraine is now almost entirely reliant on nuclear plants. Although Russia is unlikely to bomb those, it may well strike transmission lines. Kyiv is already suffering from rolling blackouts, which sap morale.

Small wonder, then, that Ukraine is desperate for more air-defence systems. America’s new aid is likely to include some missiles. Ukraine also needs launchers. It has between five and ten Patriot batteries, which protect against longer-range and faster-moving ballistic missiles. But these are defending cities, which leaves infrastructure and the front lines exposed. Ukraine is hoping Poland and Spain, among others, will donate more. The catch is that they are in high demand elsewhere, as Iran’s drone and missile barrage against Israel on April 13th underscored.

Even before any ammunition arrives, America’s latest aid provides Ukraine’s weary forces with a psychological boost. Mr Putin might have hoped that a well-timed offensive over the summer would capitalise on Ukraine’s shell shortage and make great headway. That, in turn, might have heightened doubts within NATO and among American politicians about the long-term viability of Ukraine’s resistance. If Mr Putin could show that Russia’s war machine was unstoppable and Ukraine was a lost cause, he might have hoped to strike an advantageous deal with Donald Trump, were he to become America’s president again in January, and so force a Ukrainian surrender on humiliating terms.

Ukraine’s counter-offensive last year fizzled for a variety of reasons: delayed arms deliveries from the West, a dramatic expansion of Russian fortifications during the resulting hiatus, miscalculations over how lethal a drone-saturated battlefield had become and strategic mistakes such as the decision to launch attacks in both the east and the south, splitting Ukraine’s forces. But high on the list was a lack of skill. Ukrainian units, armed with unfamiliar Western weapons, were expected to wage complex “combined-arms” warfare against prepared defences with a meagre five weeks’ training. The lack of experience in such co-ordinated attacks means that both Ukraine and Russia are largely fighting at the level of companies, rather than battalions or brigades. Even if one side could find or make a breach in the other’s lines, they would struggle to exploit it.

The side that can master large-scale operations first will have a big advantage. If Ukraine is to get there, it will take lots of training. One difficulty is withdrawing entire units from the front for long enough to provide that training. Another is where to do it. Poland, an obvious candidate, is hesitant to host training on such a scale. An alternative would be for Western troops to do it on Ukrainian soil—an idea aired by Mr Macron in March which is under consideration in Western capitals. European governments suggest that they would be unlikely to take this risk without American involvement, not least because any training sites would need to be bristling with air-defence systems.

Wherever the training occurs, it will take time. A person familiar with the planning says that it would probably take until 2026 or 2027 for Ukraine to develop a serious offensive capacity. In the interim, Ukraine would need to continue to degrade Russian combat power. A strategy paper published by Estonia’s defence ministry last year argued that Ukraine would need to kill or seriously wound 50,000 Russian troops every six months to prevent Russia from building a stronger army. It would also need to keep up long-range strikes against Crimea, the Black Sea Fleet and Russian air bases, which in turn would require a steady supply of long-range missiles. Ukraine is husbanding a relatively small stock of British and French cruise missiles; America, it emerged this week, has quietly provided some long-range ATACMS ballistic missiles, which have already been put to use. Western sanctions would also need to be tightened, to hobble Russia’s defence industry.

In other words, a big military breakthrough could be several years away for Ukraine and, even then, only if large-scale Western support is maintained and enhanced. That is far from certain, especially given the vagaries of American politics. Mr Trump is much less resolute in his support for Ukraine than Mr Biden. And even if Mr Biden is re-elected, the next Congress may be even more cantankerous about Ukraine than the current one.

Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, warns the US, the EU, NATO, and the rest of the West in The Guardian: (emphasis mine)

Ukraine’s foreign minister has enthusiastically praised US politicians for approving a long-delayed $61bn military aid package for Ukraine, but said western allies needed to recognise that “the era of peace in Europe is over” and that Kyiv would inevitably need more help to fight off Russia.

“Hallelujah,” Dmytro Kuleba said when asked for his reaction to Tuesday’s final vote by the US Senate. He said it had been “my belief that we would have a positive outcome”, based in part on the cultivation of religious conservatives, but the west needed to build its defence industry further.

Speaking to the Guardian ahead of the White House announcing a first tranche of aid including air defences, artillery rounds and armoured vehicles, Kuleba said it was “just a matter of logistics” to get the supplies to the frontline. Pentagon officials have indicated that some munitions have already been stockpiled in Europe, with Joe Biden saying on Wednesday they would arrive in hours.

Kuleba also said Ukraine had identified seven Patriot air defence systems it could use to protect civilians in major cities outside Kyiv. One had been obtained from Germany, four more had been located and negotiations were taking place, Kuleba said, and two more were in his sights.

Press reports indicate that Greece and Spain are considering whether to supply Patriots, while Poland and Romania also own the batteries. Kuleba added that an eighth system could come from the US. “I think the US army probably has one spare,” he said.

Negotiations to obtain these were complicated because “countries who operate these Patriots bargain for backfill and compensation”, Kuleba said, but he added: “I’m in no doubt, given the progress we are making, that Patriots will arrive and Germany must be commended for making the first move.”

Cities such as Kharkiv, which has been repeatedly bombed this year and seen residents move away in fear, could “live in peace and their industrial production continue”, he said, as long as Ukraine’s allies adopted a more hard-headed approach to helping his country.

He said Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, had discussed the military aid with Biden on Monday.

Kuleba said Ukraine’s allies should switch from “expressing condolences and sympathy to Ukrainians and promising to help with recovery, to preventing loss of life and destruction of the country”.

He said the restoration of US military aid, held up for months by Donald Trump-aligned Republicans, would not be sufficient to defeat Russia. “No single package can stop the Russians. What will stop the Russians is a united front of all of Ukraine and all of its partners.”

Kuleba said the west needed to increase arms production, as Ukraine had, because it had been outpaced by Russia. Russia is out-shelling Ukraine by a ratio of about 10 to one, while Ukraine is running short of air defences.

“When I see what Russia achieved in building up its defence industrial base in two years of the war and what the west has achieved, I think something is wrong on the part of the west,” Kuleba said. “The west has to realise the era of peace in Europe is over.”

Peak military industrial production on the part of Ukraine’s allies was not expected until late 2024, the foreign minister said. Most observers think the war is unlikely to finish soon and will go on into next year. Russia is expected to mount a summer offensive and is thought to be in the process of mobilising an extra 100,000 to fight.

He was dismissive of those who argued that after more than two years of full-scale war it was time for Ukraine to negotiate. He said there were “200 rounds of discussions” with the Kremlin between 2014 and the 2022 invasion.

Some observers supported peace out of naivety, he believed. Others were “playing for Putin”. A third category “did not understand Russia” or its president. They were wrongly convinced it was necessary to negotiate with the devil, he said.

The minister said Putin would only engage in meaningful talks when his military position was “close to collapse”. To get to this point, Ukraine had to pursue a twofold strategy: “success on the battlefield” and a coalition of countries to back Zelenskiy’s peace formula of a Russian withdrawal, reparations and a war crimes tribunal.

Kuleba said a move announced on Tuesday to terminate consular services for Ukrainian men of fighting age living abroad was about justice, at a time when “guys in the trenches are very tired”.

“They don’t understand why the government is not trying to bring more people into the war effort,” he said. Kuleba said it was unclear how many Ukrainian men would come back, but it was unacceptable for those outside the country to “sit down in restaurants” while others were dying.

Kuleba said he did not know how long the war with Russia would last, and on his way into the office – a Stalin-era building next to Kyiv’s gold-domed St Michael’s monastery – he had passed a funeral procession.

“Every time I pass by a funeral for a soldier I double and triple my effort to bring it to an end, with Ukraine’s victory,” he said. “I think that in the end of this war, only one side will survive and it will be Ukraine. But when I say survive, I do not mean that Russia will cease to exist as a country.”

A Ukrainian veteran now living in Texas and raising funds to supply the Ukrainian military with drones also has a warning for the US, the EU, and NATO: (emphasis mine)

I don’t want to blame our partners or allies, but Ukraine must face the reality: foreign aid is unreliable but very much needed. We have to face this and adapt to it.

Even if aid to Ukraine is in the best interest of the USA or any other European country, the populations and elites of these countries can easily be influenced by Russians through disinformation, bribery, and the use of “useful idiots.”

Russians invest billions in these campaigns to gaslight Ukraine, and sometimes they are more successful in these efforts than on the battlefield.

Ukraine must acknowledge this reality and decrease our dependency on foreign aid. There is no way that Ukraine can become completely independent from aid, and I doubt that any other nation in Europe could stand alone against the enormous Russian military machine combined with its immense natural resources.

One of the steps that Ukraine must take is to localize and scale up the production of critical arms such as APCs, artillery guns, and ammunition.

We have already done a great job producing our own drones. I would rate the Shark UAVs as having the best cost/effectiveness ratio among medium-sized surveillance drones in the world. Ukraine has built its own army of long-range kamikaze drones capable of penetrating Russian air defenses and striking targets as deep as 800km. Ukraine excels in producing large quantities of small attack drones, $500-$1,000 attack drones, and so-called hovering Baba-Yaga heavy munition-dropping drones that cost around $15,000-$20,000.

Also, Ukraine’s investment in producing the home-grown SPG Bohdana is paying off, and Ukraine is on its way to reequipping its forces. The production rate of over 10 howitzers a month and growing will probably make the Bohdana the most produced SPG in the world.

The key advantage of localizing production is its cost; while Western equipment is of high quality, it comes at an incredible cost of tens of millions of dollars. The price of the Caesar SPG is around $10 million, while I estimate a similar Ukrainian-made SPG to cost only $3 million.

Another result of this acknowledgment must be the understanding that this war is going to last a long time, and Ukraine needs to innovate in building its fortifications. We should move beyond simply putting together a few trenches and some logs with concrete. Instead, Ukraine’s military leadership must invest in designing and constructing a new type of fortification. New standards and instructions must be developed. We can’t afford to make mistakes; individual brigades can’t guess what will work or not—they need clear instructions, materials, and equipment to quickly assemble secure, concrete, and metal-reinforced, well-concealed positions. Trenches must have overhead protection against FPV and surveillance drones. The soldiers occupying those trenches must be trained to quickly rebuild this protection in case of damage; it has to be simple to erect, and the infantry must be trained to do it.

In the context of this large-scale conflict, the shortsightedness of Ukrainian partners must be taken into account by our political and military leadership. We can’t blame partners for being slow or inadequate; however, we must adapt to it and do what we can to survive.

The free portion of Donetsk Oblast:

 

In the Donetsk region, 88yo pan Ivan walked on foot from the temporarily occupied part of his village after the invaders had tried to force him to accept russian citizenship. Volunteers met him in the govt-controlled territory and evacuated to safety.

With one action this elderly man showed how malicious are analytical workings of the peace-dealing and russia-appeasing minds who push for giving up on people like pan Ivan for the sake of gifting russia another time-out to rearm and attack again. russian occupation isn’t peace, it’s a concentration camp

Source: Donetsk regional administration

Kharkiv:

 

I’ve only been in Kharkiv for three days and I already fully understand the horror and stress people here live under.
One moment you are calmly walking down the street, the next a rocket flies over your head. At one point, you try to go to sleep peacefully and wake up to explosions all around you and at the moment I am talking about my personal experiences.

It’s all still so surreal here that someone constantly wants to destroy this beautiful city and kill the people who are here…

Anyone who is against sending aid to Ukraine should be sent here for a week.. maybe then they will understand the horror that is happening here every day..

Krasnohorivka:

Long video of a Russian armored assault on Krasnohorivka. The lead tank with the large shelter was left behind after its mine-roller reportedly got stuck but the other tanks and BMP/MT-LB continued the assault. It looks as though some of the other tanks/vehicles may have been lost but others continued despite strikes by mines, FPVs, or other munitions.
https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/10339

The video in Rob Lee’s tweet has been edited towards the end. You can see where the edits were made. The dismounted Russians were trying to remove an anti-tank mine. They failed to do so. I’ve seen the full video of the results of that failure and I’m not posting it. Don’t go looking for it. You don’t need to see it!

More on the turtle tanks:

The southern front:

Tallyho!

 

Lord, guard and guide the ones who fly
Through the great spaces in the sky.
Be with them always in the air,
In darkening storms or sunlight fair;
Oh, hear us when we lift our prayer,
For those in peril in the air!

For you drone enthusiasts:

Report from the Ukrainian border guard service featuring Vampire drones a.k.a. Baba Yaga. Journalists visited the location of the Pomsta brigade and observed the night work of a heavy bomber drone. These drones are used not only for attacks on manpower but also for remote mining of enemy rear areas.

Obligatory:

Russia:

They seem nice!

Omsk, Russia:

I’m pretty sure combustion is the reason.

That’s enough for tonight.

Your daily Patron!

There are no new Patron tweets or videos today. Here’s some adjacent material.

It’s sort of an animal video.

Open thread!

Reader Interactions

87Comments

  1. 1.

    hrprogressive

    Surprised to see this up for nearly an hour with no other comments…

    Have you any inkling on whether the aid will actually help achieve a victory, or it’s just designed to delay losing long enough for the west to throw up their hands and claim they tried but oh well?

    I may have already asked and you may have already commented, I apologize, I’m not sure I can remember.

    Thanks.

  2. 2.

    SpaceUnit

    I’m often just so overwhelmed by these posts that I don’t know of anything to say.  Makes me want to go pour a stiff drink.

    Seems strange that Russian casualties are so incredibly high, but that it hasn’t produced any political backlash.  I guess that was the purpose of Navalny’s murder – to create a populace too cowed to protest.  What a fucking mess.

  3. 3.

    japa21

    @hrprogressive: Will it help to achieve a victory? Probably, along with a lot of additional assistance.  Will it be enough on its own to do so? No.  As to the second question.  I am confident the answer is no.

  4. 4.

    Andrya

    @hrprogressive:   I think it’s important to think about what would constitute victory.  While I would love to see Ukraine oust russia from Crimea and Donetsk, that seems to me a stretch.  The Armed Forces of Ukraine are not going to march into Moscow.  (Other commenters with military cred that I don’t have are welcome to correct me.)

    However, the American revolutionaries in the 18th century defeated Britain without marching into London, and the North Vietnamese defeated the US without marching into Washington DC.  In both cases, the revolutionaries ran up the cost of the war, year after year, to the point that the more powerful country simply gave up.

    I think that type of victory is entirely achievable.

    ETA:  I’m thinking about a situation with a frozen conflict, russia sits hostile behind frozen borders, but a free Ukraine can continue democracy, and join the EU and (hopefully) eventually NATO.

  5. 5.

    Adam L Silverman

    @hrprogressive: I honestly don’t know. Because I don’t have any actual knowledge of Ukraine’s theater strategy and campaign plan. I expect they’ll be very helpful in stabilizing the battlespace. I also expect that like the F-16s, these ATACMS, have come far after they would have been of optimal use.

  6. 6.

    Adam L Silverman

    @SpaceUnit: It is because the bulk of the Russian forces are from well outside of Moscow and St. Petersburg. They are largely ethnic minorities from the various Mongol majority regions along the border with Mongolia and from out in Siberia and the other parts of eastern Russia.

  7. 7.

    Chet Murthy

    @Adam L Silverman: I saw this yesterday: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/04/25/european-trained-ukrainian-f-16-pilots-will-not-be-ready-until-late-2024_6669456_4.html#:~:text=War%20in%20Ukraine-,European%2Dtrained%20Ukrainian%20F%2D16%20pilots%20will%20not%20be%20ready,experience%20required%20for%20combat%20aviation.

    European-trained Ukrainian F-16 pilots will not be ready until late 2024
    Aged between 21 and 23, with very little experience, the 10 soldiers in training will have to spend several more months training before they acquire the knowledge and experience required for combat aviation.

    Sigh.

  8. 8.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Chet Murthy: Not surprised. The 155 mm shells the Czechs are trying to purchase for the Ukrainians are not likely to arrive before August either.

  9. 9.

    karen marie

    @hrprogressive: I rarely comment on these posts because there’s nothing I can do other than read it and weep (and donate what money I can).

    I very much appreciate Adam’s dedication to gathering and posting about what’s happening every day.  It is very easy to forget or minimize the ongoing tragedy but we do so at our peril.  As the EU minister said, Putin is not going to stop at destroying Ukraine.

  14. 14.

    Andrya

    @Jay:  PeaceisPossible is absolutely a russian troll.   I’d point out one thing developed in their disgusting spiel-  russia demands no NATO on its borders, meaning all neighbors cannot have alliances, but ALSO reserves the right to invade and conquer any neighbor that they consider to be mystically part of the “ruskii mir”.

    As in, you have to be disarmed, and I can eat you any time I like.

    Fuck you, PeaceisPossible.

  17. 17.

    SpaceUnit

    I don’t know where this person went to troll school but they failed the class on reading a room.

  18. 18.

    wjca

    @Andrya: I’m thinking about a situation with a frozen conflict, russia sits hostile behind frozen borders, but a free Ukraine can continue democracy, and join the EU and (hopefully) eventually NATO.

    At this point, I think the only acceptable frozen borders are the ones that obtained before Russia invaded Crimea and Donbas, i.e. pre-2014.  That is, the only ones Ukraine will accept.  They’ve seen what comes of letting Russia keep any gains they have made.  I can’t see them being willing to make that mistake again.

    I agree that Ukraine isn’t going to march on Moscow.  But that’s not the same as not attacking Russian military targets close to, and visible from, Moscow.  In fact, while other military targets may be higher priority right now, bringing the reality of the war home to Russians in Moscow is probably a prerequisite for convincing Russia to give up the whole adventure as a bad job.

  19. 19.

    Another Scott

    Meanwhile, … APNews.com:

    […]

    A senior U.S. military official said Thursday the U.S. is on track to begin delivering aid using the new port and pier by early May. The official, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss details not yet made public, said deliveries through the sea route initially will total about 90 trucks a day and could quickly increase to about 150 trucks daily.

    The senior official acknowledged, however, that the final installation of the U.S.-built causeway onto the beach at the port will be governed by the security situation, which is assessed daily. The Israeli Defense Force has a brigade — thousands of soldiers — as well as ships and aircraft dedicated to protecting the deliveries, the official said.

    Asked about the recent mortar attack, the miliary [sic] official said the U.S. assesses that it had nothing to do with the humanitarian mission, adding that security around the port will be “far more robust” when the deliveries start.

    In addition, the U.S. has rehearsed offensive and defensive measures to ensure U.S. troops working at the pier and those on the floating platform several miles off shore are all protected.

    Aid groups have been shaken by the deaths of seven World Central Kitchen aid workers in an Israeli airstrike on April 1 as they traveled in clearly marked vehicles on a delivery mission authorized by Israel. The killings have hardened sentiment among some aid groups that the international community should focus instead on pushing Israel to ease obstacles to the delivery of aid on land routes by truck.

    The World Central Kitchen staff, who were honored at a memorial service Thursday in Washington, are among more than 200 humanitarian workers killed in Gaza, a toll the U.N. says is three times higher than any previous number for aid workers in a single year of any war.

    Development of the port and pier comes as Israel faces widespread international criticism over the slow trickle of aid into the Palestinian territory, where the United Nations says at least a quarter of the population sits on the brink of starvation.

    This is how the sea route will work:

    — Pallets of aid will be inspected and loaded onto mainly commercial ships in Cyprus, which then will sail about 200 miles to the large floating platform being built by the U.S. military.

    — The pallets will be transferred onto trucks, driven onto smaller Army vessels and then taken several miles to the causeway, which will be roughly 1,800 feet, or 550 meters, long and anchored to the shoreline by the Israeli military.

    — The trucks will then go down the causeway to a secure drop-off area, where pallets will be distributed to aid agencies. That mission could last several months, the U.S. military official said.

    A U.N. official said the port will likely have three zones — one controlled by the Israelis where aid from the pier is dropped off, another where the aid will be transferred, and a third where Palestinian drivers contracted by the U.N. will wait to pick up the aid before bringing it to distribution points.

    The construction of the new port in the Gaza Strip appears to have been moving quickly over the last two weeks, according to satellite images analyzed Thursday by The Associated Press. Offshore, U.S. Navy and Army vessels have started the construction of the large pier, or floating platform.

    […]

    (Emphasis added.)

    Fingers crossed.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  20. 20.

    Traveller

    Jay has mentioned on several occasions the recruitment of foreign fighters into the Russian Army…this is true, but it may have grown to  an alarming extent over time. And, naturally enough, this is quite worrisome to me.

    Jay mentioned 15,000 from Nepal alone, (a number that I hope is wrong), but there are confirmed cases of recruits from Cuba, Colombia, Nepal, India, etc

    On April 1, 2024, Putin signed a decree offering citizenship to  any foreign persons signing up to fight in the Russia Army, for themselves and their families, (I believe normal recruitment contracts are for 5 years, but will gladly be corrected on this if I am wrong).

    It seems to me that it is one thing to prevail against the Russian State and its population, an event I still see as distinctly possible, but it is another thing entirely to defeat the poor and wretched of the world where a $1,700.00 dollar signing bonus is…almost unbelievable wealth.

    The one war against Russia I believe is winnable, the war against the poor of the world that forms an active recruiting pool for the Russian Army probably is not.

    It is true that unit cohesion with foreign fighters is necessarily a problem for Russia, its officer and NCO Corps…but this remains my dominant concern with the execution of this war. Best Wishes, Traveller

  22. 22.

    Yutsano

    National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby hinted Tuesday that Ukraine still doesn’t have a fully formed plan to defeat Russia

    Excuse me a moment but…

    WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK IS THIS FUCKING BULLSHIT FUCKING COMING OUT FROM YOUR EVERFUCKING MOUTH YOU FUCKING FUCKSTICK?

    Their endgame is to get their fucking land back fuckwad. That’s it. That’s how this ends. Pushing Russia back to the internationally recognized borders is how Ukraine 🇺🇦 ends this. Fucking resign Kirby. That stupid burned me so bad I’m gonna end up in the ICU again.

  23. 23.

    Lyrebird

    Thank you Adam for your work, and

    thank you @Jay: for confirming.

     

    In case anyone knows and has a minute: The joyous little caterpillar-shaped dog at :33 in the UAnimals video, is that a particular breed of dog?

  24. 24.

    wjca

    @SpaceUnit: I don’t know where this person went to troll school but they failed the class on reading a room.

    He also missed (because, even if he failed he would have absorbed something) the class on achieving a veneer of plausibility.  And the one on subtlety.

  26. 26.

    Andrya

    @wjca:  I don’t think we disagree.  I would expect an outcome where Ukrainian missiles make Crimea unusable to russia.  If the outcome is better than what I expect, I would be totally happy.  My point was simply that a stalemate that leaves a large majority of Ukraine free and democratic looks entirely achievable.

  27. 27.

    hrprogressive

    Hello, thank you to the multiple folks who responded to me.

    Adam, I appreciate your candor. Sometimes “I don’t know” is definitely valid.

    To the others (apologies, on mobile, not always the best at formatting and capturing everything in this little box here) –

    I – being a complete layperson with no military or foreign policy background, at all –

    Would like to think that “Ukrainian Victory” would = “Complete expulsion of all occupying Russian Forces out of Ukraine Proper, with 100% control of their own country and borders, free from assault and death being rained down upon them”.

    Perhaps that’s too lofty of a goal, but if it is, then I am not sure how else you would define it.

    I think that if there’s anything *but* that as a “Victory Condition”, then you absolutely set the stage for Putin/His Successor to “Try Again” either in Ukraine, or “Try Somewhere Else”.

    If Ukraine, with the help of western allies, pushes Russia completely out, and then for example, acceeds into NATO, I think even Vlad would have to think twice about another go at it.

    I, not being Ukrainian myself, have never thought Kyiv would “March on Moscow”, nor do I think the west would support that either.

    Ukrainians want their homeland unoccupied and free for their people. That’s it.

    Putin wants to absorb as much territory as he can into Russia and/or trying to obliterate the globe, depending on the day.

    My concern is that the west really doesn’t want to put in the effort into helping Ukraine achieve “Victory”, but rather for the war of attrition to go on for so long that eventually they all decide to try and appease Putin and we get Sudentenland 2.0 and that, well, isn’t gonna go the way they hope it would.

    I would really prefer for the world war that’s been mostly cold for 15+ years not go “hot”, and I think defeating Russia in Ukraine has a higher likelihood of preventing that than allowing them to seize Ukraine and bulldoze their way thru the rest of Eastern Europe.

    But again, I’m definitely an armchair quarterback, so I am sure there’s many somethings I am not considering here.

    Cheers all.

  28. 28.

    Another Scott

    @Lyrebird: Nothing is jumping out at me.  It looks like a mix of Pomeranian and Pug and Dachshund to me.  It’s quite a fluffball, isn’t it?

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  29. 29.

    Another Scott

    Interesting TWZ.com piece on integrating modern NATO weapons with old Soviet-era planes:

    [Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Dr. William] LaPlante was speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank’s annual Global Security Forum yesterday, April 24, 2024. When asked to provide examples of successful programs that rapidly developed capabilities and got them into the hands of the military, one example he chose was the tablets in Ukrainian fighter cockpits:

    “There’s also a series of … we call it ‘air-to-ground,’ it’s what we call it euphemistically … think about the aircraft that the Ukrainians have, and not even the F-16s, but they have a lot of the Russian and Soviet-era aircraft. Working with the Ukrainians, we’ve been able to take many Western weapons and get them to work on their aircraft where it’s basically controlled by an iPad by the pilot. And they’re flying it in conflict like a week after we get it to him.”

    LaPlante didn’t provide further details, but it’s noteworthy that a video recently released by the Ukrainian Air Force shows a Su-27 Flanker fitted with exactly this type of system — possibly an iPad, but perhaps also another kind of commercially available tablet.

    Slava Ukraini!!

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  30. 30.

    Lyrebird

    @Another Scott: Thanks A_S!  It is quite a fluffball.

    May all the Ukr doggos get their hoomans back victorious, and soon!

    I am not the realistic prediction commenter, but I figure it takes all kinds.

  31. 31.

    Jay

    @Traveller:

    It is true that unit cohesion with foreign fighters is necessarily a problem for Russia, its officer and NCO Corps…but this remains my dominant concern with the execution of this war.

    1). very few of the “Foreign Fighters” are actual “volunteers” or have any military background. Most have accepted offers for “civilian jobs”, (programmer, security guard, retail, etc). They get a paid ticket into ruZZia, are arrested once they land as “illegals” and are given a choice, sign a contract with the ruZZian Army, or 10 years in a gulag. That does not create an effective fighting force, more so that they are given at best 5 hours “training” then sent to the front lines as “storm forces”, aka, “meatcubes”.

    2). In the ruZZian Army caste system, they are the lowest of the low, below ethic ruZZians, below criminals, below “roosters” and are treated as such. Again, does not make for an effective fighting force.

    3). Aside from being poorly trained, they are poorly armored with substandard “body and helmets, often cheap AirSoft” gear, and are usually sent into assaults with an old AK and a few grenades.

    4). Most of the countries where this illegal human trafficking is taking place, are taking steps to shut the trafficking down and try to get their citizens back.

    5). It’s also giving ruZZia a really bad “black eye” in those nations. Nepal for example is postering warnings about the con outside the ruZZian Embassy and Consulates and raiding the “Companies” engages in the trade and charging them with serious crimes.

  33. 33.

    PeaceisPossible

    @Andrya: I’m an American. Ordinary citizen.

    You don’t have to agree with anything I write! I think it’s a little more interesting to have someone disagree with the commonly held beliefs here, but maybe that’s just me!

    If we one day want peace, we have to at least understand our current “enemy’s” grievances. That timeline above is accurate, and we in the US should accept our share of blame.

    JFK said all this better, though, and at a time when we had a much more powerful adversary – the Soviet Union (he also secretly negotiated with Khrushchev to end the Cuban Missile Crisis. There’s a lesson in that, too):

    https://youtu.be/0fkKnfk4k40?si=0ZjJcMnkL-VIWSXO

  35. 35.

    Gin & Tonic

    @PeaceisPossible: No, your timeline is not “accurate” – it has so many misstatements of “fact” and misguided conclusions that I could spend half the night correcting them, and I don’t have the time or patience.

  36. 36.

    YY_Sima Qian

    A few Chinese nationals (the “adventure seeking type” w/o steady employment) have volunteered to joint the Russian Army and fight in Ukraine. They accounts have been spreading Chinese social media, most have been KIA already. One thing that I noticed was that these few Chinese volunteers were invariably inserted into units primarily composed of Indians & Nepalese, who in turn were mostly lured by money. It was also clear from these accounts that these foreign units suffer from very poor training, very poor supply, extremely low moral, zero esprit de corps, & its every man for himself on the battlefield.

  37. 37.

    Andrya

    @PeaceisPossible:   I didn’t assert that you were a russian national,  just that you were trolling for russia.  A lot of American citizen right-wingers (for example, Marjorie Taylor Greene and JD Vance) are trolling for russia.

    You are in exactly the same moral position as Neville Chamberlain handing over Czechoslovakia to Adolph Hitler.

  39. 39.

    glc

    @Andrya: I know this is purely rhetorical, but Winston Churchill in his eulogy for Neville Chamberlain said

    We can be sure that Neville Chamberlain acted with perfect sincerity according to his lights and strove to the utmost of his capacity and authority, which were powerful, to save the world from the awful, devastating struggle in which we are now engaged.

    Not really comparable.

  40. 40.

    Andrya

    @glc:   We can respectfully agree to disagree.  I don’t know if this was Churchill’s idea of courtesy to a fallen foe, or if he was being a politician courting the peacenik faction of the Conservative Party, or if he really believed it- but the fact is, Chamberlain threw the Czechs under the bus, and delivered them to a hideous fate.

    Full disclosure:  although Churchill gets full credit for leading the UK in WW2, I am not among those who idolize him.  Three words:  Bengal famine 1943.

  41. 41.

    PeaceisPossible

    @Andrya: We haven’t once tried to negotiate with Russia, so how could we know.

    We’re always told our enemy is “Hitler”, but that’s just a tried and true neocon propaganda tactic. Works every time, and is only semi-true on extremely rare occasions.

    Russia has previously signalled an openness to negotiations (and has participated in negotiations, which we sabotaged).

    Why don’t we call Russia’s bluff? If they prove they’re insincere, we have even more incentive to send weapons.

  45. 45.

    PeaceisPossible

    @SpaceUnit: We are to negotiate for the lives & land of an entire generation of Ukrainians and a great number of Russians who will suffer horrible deaths if this continues.

    If you’re so enthusiastic to keep this losing war going, head to the front lines with the working class people of both countries. I bet they’re having a blast.

  46. 46.

    wjca

    @PeaceisPossible: We haven’t once tried to negotiate with Russia, so how could we know.

    Why do you think we should be negotiating with Russia?  It isn’t our country that has been invaded.  It isn’t our country which is being devastated.

    The Ukranians have negotiated with Russia.  Which experience leads them to distrust anything Russia says.  Anything Russia promises.

  47. 47.

    SpaceUnit

    @PeaceisPossible:

    Ukrainians are fighting for their lives.  They are fighting against a sociopathic dictator.

    Buzz off.  Seriously, that’s my good faith advice.  Buzz off because you’ll get no traction here.  Turn off your phone.  Turn off the television.   Turn off the computer and radio.  Just sit quietly in a chair and rethink your life.

  48. 48.

    PeaceisPossible

    @Jay:

    Do you know any US history? Everything we accuse others of we have committed ourselves.

    Martin Luther King, Jr correctly called us “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world”. Was he a Russian puppet, or are you a new McCarthyite?

    Remember when Madeleine Albright was told that 500,000 Iraqi children died due to our sanctions, and she said it was worth it?

    Remember when we supported Saddam and then wanted him killed? When we supported Osama bin Laden against Russia and then wanted him killed?

    Remember when we supported an ongoing genocide in Israel of 2 million brown people in Palestine?

    Remember Abu Ghraib? Guantanamo?

    All the post-WW2 coups on countries that never did a thing to us, or to anyone else? You know, the normal countries that don’t police the world?

    I could go on lol

  49. 49.

    clay

    Adam, I don’t know if you’re still around, but if you are: do you have any thoughts about the protests and arrests at Emory University today?

    Emory says that the protesters were mostly from outside the community, and that they set up tents (!) on the Quad (!). Which makes me wonder: if this is true, who is organizing this, an attempted takeover of a major university?

  50. 50.

    PeaceisPossible

    @SpaceUnit: It’s easy to believe you’re right when all your domestic and foreign enemies are sociopaths who have no rational grievances.

    And it’s okay to have disagreements – that used to be a common phenomenon before we all got into our own media bubbles.

    I appreciate being allowed to state dissent here, however useless & feeble my efforts may be.

  54. 54.

    YY_Sima Qian

    @PeaceisPossible: I think Russian conduct leading up to & through the course of the current invasion should dispel any illusion one might have about Putin. This war is not about pushing back against NATO/EU expansion into its backyard, not w/ the way Putin has grievous damaged Russia’s civilian economy, consumed so much of the Russian military’s combat power & Russia’s war making potential in Ukraine, leaving Russia deeply dependent on the PRC & its defenses sparse everywhere else long its extremely long borders. Plus, Russian policies in occupied Ukraine are transparently attempting to erase the Ukrainians as a culturally distinct people, & engaging in crimes against humanity (such as kidnapping the Ukrainian children to be Russified & forced emigration of Ukrainians to distant parts of Russia) to achieve this end.

    Yes, Russia’s national sovereignty is backstopped by its nukes, so neither NATO nor the PRC are interested in invading Russia even in its currently vulnerable state, but that backstop exists in the alternate timeline where Russia did not invade & Ukraine joined NATO & the EU.

    Contra the likes cultural determinists such as Kamil Galeev, I do not believe the rise of a Tsarist figure such as Putin was inevitable for Russia. That is far too Orientalist for my taste, & such views have been weaponized against just about every non-Western or non-NW European countries/peoples, including country in the fUSSR & CEE. I do believe past US/Western policies in Europe & toward Russia helped to precipitate the rise of Putin, & helped Putin to consolidate his rule over domestic rivals. The project for common security in Europe post-Cold War did not have to be based on preserving NATO w/ such deep involvement & dominance by the US. (Any arrangement definitely needed to bring in the fUSSR & Warsaw Pact states. Ideally, it should include Russia, but that would have depended on whether Russia is willing to constrain its revanchist & hegemonic ambitions). The “Shock Therapy” advise & the gleeful participation by Western capital to loot Russian (& other fUSSR) assets did not help, either. I think Putin perhaps was sincere in 2004 when he broached the subject of Russian jointing NATO/EU. However, the price for Russia’s voluntary integration into Europe required bending/breaking the structures so that Russia can reassert its hegemony over large parts of Europe, which was a nonstarter for countries not named Russia.

    Everyone has agency in how things evolved to where they stand today, and & it behooves the responsible policymaker to assess one’s own contributions if we are to avoid a repeat, but that kind of introspection is typically beyond the capability of great powers. However, since 2008 & certainly since 2014, it is now transparently clear that Putin is seeking to reassert Russian hegemony over the fUSSR & then the former sphere of influence of the USSR/Russian Empire, through greyzone tactics & by force of arms, & the statements & actions have consistently been in bad faith.

    I used to hold similar opinions as you, even after Russia seized Crimea & most of Donbass. The current invasion has opened my eyes, & made me realize just how much my own perceptions had been colored by the deeply ingrained (almost unconscious) Russo-centrism pervasive even in Western (let alone Chinese) MSM, academia & government bureaucracy.

  55. 55.

    wjca

    @PeaceisPossible: And it’s okay to have disagreements – that used to be a common phenomenon before we all got into our own media bubbles.

    People here have disagreements all the time.  Productive ones.  For the simple reason that everybody respects the idea of using data from the real world.  The disagreements tend to be because we have different sets of facts — but they are all subsets of facts in the real world.

    Radical suggestion: if you want anybody to take you seriously, try getting facts from the real world.  Because basing your arguments on fantasies isn’t going to sway anyone.

  56. 56.

    Bill Arnold

    @PeaceisPossible:

    I could go on lol

    You could, yes.
    [Assuming here on that you are not engaging in sophisticated trolling.]
    You might not realize it, and may never accept it; you present as a gullible tool of Russian propagandists, shouting out from a well-armored echo chamber[1]. Seriously. Poke hard and honestly at a few randomly chosen assertions in your “timeline” (or the comment I’m replying to), and you may find yourself surprised. Look a bit for the blatant gaps in that “timeline”, as well. And do not ignore the frequent clear expressions (many Russian venues, many Russian parties) of the genocidal nature of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. History is complicated, and lawyer-style argumentation about history (or contemporary conflicts) is irritating Is Not The Way.

    [1] Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles (C. Thi Nguyen, Episteme 17 (2):141-161 (2020)) (pdf download button at link. Some of the references are interesting, as are some of the articles that cite this (google scholar for cites))

  57. 57.

    SpaceUnit

    @PeaceisPossible:

    Also, a very basic troll skill is understanding the difference between when you’re upsetting a certain online community and when they’re having a blast slapping the ever-loving shit out of you.

  59. 59.

    Jay

    @YY_Sima Qian:

    I know that you mean well,

    but you are trying to engage with someone who got their “deeply held personal beliefs” from Kim Dotcom’s substack.

    It’s only a matter of time before they try to “WhatsApp” you, send you racy pictures and try to sell you crypto.

  62. 62.

    YY_Sima Qian

    @Jay: Actually I wrote that as a reminder that, while it is certainly not true that only the US or only the West has agency in world affairs turning to sh*t, it is also not true that the US or the West has little agency when things turn to sh*t. I do feel that, while perfectly understandable, Putin’s naked aggression against Ukraine has removed the space in the West to discuss how Western actions in the post-Cold War period, or going all the way back to the post-WW II settlement, helped to create the conditions for how things have evolved. Ultimately, that is not healthy.

    I also wrote it because IMO it is actually possible for people to hold such opinion even if they are not trolling on behalf of Russia. It requires willfully not paying any attention to Russian conduct in Ukraine since 2022, & since 2014, or the unvarnished Russian rhetoric. I don’t think the views expressed by PeaceisPossible are necessarily out of bounds, either, in a vacuum. Wars will eventually end via diplomacy, since Russia is incapable of conquering Ukraine & Ukraine is not interested in conquering Russia. Many IR scholars of the Realist or Left Wing disposition, whom I generally otherwise respect, are distressingly sympathetic to such views. However, in the reality we live in, it is abundantly clear that the only way Russia will negotiate in good faith & keep to the terms of the settlement, is if it suffers decisive defeat on the battlefield, & the rest of the world (including the US, the EU, the PRC, India, Türkiye, etc.) have an interest in holding Russia to the negotiated terms.

  63. 63.

    Jay

    @YY_Sima Qian:

    I don’t think the views expressed by PeaceisPossible are necessarily out of bounds, either, in a vacuum.

    The tankie/vatnick’s first post was full on ruZZian firehose with 78 blatant lies in it.

    Even if you completely rely on Felon Musk’s shitter feed for your “facts”, one cannot be that stupid to post that shit here.

    The only way you can be that stupid to post that shit here is if you are following a script from Moscow.

  64. 64.

    YY_Sima Qian

    @Jay: Oh, I agree wrt the timeline PeaceisPossible posted.

    I was referring to the notions that even one’s geopolitical rivals & adversaries have legitimate interests, preserving peace necessarily means to some extent accommodating those interests, & wars eventually end (typically) through diplomatic engagement w/ one’s opponents. Total victory such as at the end of WW II is the exception.

    None of that applies to Russia in Ukraine right now. In a war ending settlement? Perhaps. Even if the Russian Federation devolves, Muscovy would still have legitimate interests (nation sovereignty, territorial integrity, etc.). For the conditions to exist to achieve a just peace through war ending settlement, Ukraine needs decisive victories on the battlefield 1st, & the support to make decisive victory possible. Otherwise Putin will just lick his wounds for a few years & try again using less kinetic means.

  65. 65.

    wjca

    @Jay: The only way you can be that stupid to post that shit here is if you are following a script from Moscow.

    They (if you prefer) reminds me strongly of a class of kids I knew in college.  They were more or less reasonable (for college students).  But they had spent several years immersed exclusively in an information flow from Moscow.  They had no clue as to its origin, but it provided their entire view of the world outside of their own immediate personal experience.

    Mostly, they were impervious to facts which conflicted with what they thought they knew.  But occasionally one could be reached.

  66. 66.

    PeaceisPossible

    @YY_Sima Qian:

    I appreciate this response that actually tries to dispute ideas.

    1. I would argue that Russia is following a more cautious path than we often do in our many unnecessary wars. Here, for example, from NYT in Sept 2022: US expresses “bafflement” that Russia hadn’t yet destroyed critical infrastructure (the way they would in Russia’s situation):

    Some American officials express concern that the most dangerous moments are yet to come, even as Mr. Putin has avoided escalating the war in ways that have, at times, baffled Western officials.
    He has made only limited attempts to destroy critical infrastructure or to target Ukrainian government buildings. He has not attacked the supply hubs outside Ukraine.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/politics/ukraine-biden-weapons.html

    Compare and contrast the US/west’s quick accusations of Russians war crimes with their zero accusations of Israeli war crimes. There are clearly worthy victims in Ukraine and unworthy victims in Gaza, according to the US.

    Is it possible that we’re lying to the world on behalf of Israel (who bombs the helpless) and lying against Russia (who is fighting an army via trench warfare)?

    How many children have been killed in Israel, a clear ethnic cleansing if not genocide, in just a matter of months? Compare that number with Ukraine after 2+ years.

    2. Russia entered Ukraine with maybe 100,000 troops, not nearly enough to conquer a country, much less conquer all of Europe. Could it be that Russia wants only the parts of Ukraine that are already sympathetic to it? The parts that Kyiv was shelling long before Feb 2022? The parts that should’ve been kept peaceful under Minsk II? I don’t think they want Kyiv, do you? Kyiv would revolt, while eastern Ukraine would not.

    3. I agree that we are dealing with great powers. Ukraine is in an awful position between two great powers (one is protecting its border, and one is projecting hegemony on the other side of the world). Obama warned against getting involved and arming Ukraine, because it’s a losing game and would cross Russia’s red line.

    4. The idea that we are somehow subconsciously Russian influenced seems incorrect to me. Most people here, on a “liberal?” blog, sound exactly like Bush era neoconservatives/Cold warriors. So obsessively hawkish that they should be on the front lines

    Sorry if I haven’t addressed everything. Feel free to bring anything up that I might’ve missed

  67. 67.

    SpaceUnit

    The syntax of this troll seems oddly familiar to me, but I can’t put my finger on it.  Anyone else?

     

    They’ve trolled here before under a different name.

     

    ETA:  I’m certain.

  68. 68.

    YY_Sima Qian

    @PeaceisPossible: Putin invaded Ukraine w/ an understrength & underprepared (& incompetent as it turned out ) force because he expected Ukraine to collapse & willing collaborators take over, all based on bad intelligence on Ukraine, & bad assessment of Russia.

    Anyway, since you resolutely refuse to confront what Russia has actually done in Ukraine since Feb. 2022, I don’t think we will have a productive conversation.

  69. 69.

    Jay

    @YY_Sima Qian:

    @wjca:

    One of the things I find myself LAMO off about the vatnick/tankie/St. Petersburg trolls is how dumb they are.

    Had they even read the OP, they would have come in with some kind of engagement first, rather than posting a cut and paste St. Petersburg script.

    They followed that up with the usual script, as if we had never seen a ruZZian troll before.

    But I understand, they have to make X posts a day, across a broad array of social media, and where it once met that if, like the ’80’s spammers, they didn’t meet their quota a day, they wouldn’t get their rubles,

    now if they don’t meet their quota, not only do they not get the tiny amount of rubles, but they get dragged from their cubicle and sent to the SMO as a meat cube.

    Weak sauce.

    So they don’t even really try, other than to meet their quota.

  72. 72.

    wjca

    @PeaceisPossible:  Russia entered Ukraine with maybe 100,000 troops, not nearly enough to conquer a country, much less conquer all of Europe. Could it be that Russia wants only the parts of Ukraine that are already sympathetic to it? The parts that Kyiv was shelling long before Feb 2022?

    As has apparently escaped your notice, Putin expected that Ukraine would be conquered with merely the forces he attacked with.  He, and the troops, thought they would be greeted with cheers, not with anti-tank missiles.

    Turned out he was wrong on that, but expectation was exactly that the troops used would be enough to conquer the entire country.  And in days; a couple of weeks at most.  So, no, Russia was definitively not only interested in part of the country.  Putin’s own words make that entirely clear.

    The “parts of Ukraine that are already sympathetic” to Russia might, maybe, have consisted of Crimea.  Or maybe not even there.  But the rest of the country?  No.  Russia had seized control of the southeast of Ukraine a decade ago using covert troops (“little green men”); there wasn’t anything like popular support for Russia there.  What Ukraine was shelling there were Russian positions, not the population generally.

  73. 73.

    PeaceisPossible

     

    @YY_Sima Qian: Okay! To be clear, I don’t believe the invasion was justified, even if it was provoked.

    I just see no better route for Ukraine than to negotiate a ceasefire and peace right now.

    If Russia can’t be trusted to negotiate, then neither can we and neither can Ukraine. Still, someone has to negotiate.

    But instead we’ll see the outcome of your strategy. It won’t be good for anyone except a tiny sliver of war profiteers.

  74. 74.

    Traveller

    @Jay: ​
      I apologize, I took the 15,000 number too seriously in that this would be a full Division and at such a size would solve most of the unit cohesion and probably most language problems also.

    The other failings you noted are real also….but I’ve been busy all day this just sat badly within me. I probably over reacted…this entire Ukraine/Russian War at times makes me crazy. Best Wishes, Traveller

  77. 77.

    bjacques

    It’s always amazed me that, at setbacks like this (final passage of the aid bill), Putin hasn’t had some vatnik, tankie, or troll publicly poisoned or defenestrated, pour encourageur les autres.

  78. 78.

    Jay

    @bjacques:

    We only track Ogliarches falling out windows, committing suicide by stabbing themselves 27 times inside a gym bag or their jet blowing up in the sky, (smoking accident),

    other than you know, guys like Russel Bentley, etc

    While PeaceisPossible may have been banned, we don’t really know. They might have met a “Black Maria” for weak trolling, we will never know.

  79. 79.

    Bruce K in ATH-GR

    @Andrya: Chamberlain did have one excuse that the troll can’t claim, though: fresh memories of the War to End War, which savaged the better part of an entire generation of people.

    The troll doesn’t even have that excuse.

  81. 81.

    Jay

    @Bruce K in ATH-GR:

    Chamberlain was also trying to “buy time”.

    Germany was only supposed to get the Sudetenland.

    Instead, in short order, Poland took a chunk, Hungary took a chunk, Slovakia declared independence, and shortly there after Hitler took it all.

    With all the war material loot Germany acquired, (Skoda, CKV, etc) it allowed for Germany to double the size of their army.

  83. 83.

    Gin & Tonic

    @PeaceisPossible: Have you been to Donetsk? How do you know the residents were “sympathetic” to russia?

    There was no organic separatist movement in 2013-14. None. This is very well-documented. Yes, the people who live there speak russian. That does not mean they want to be part of russia, just as English speakers in Ireland do not wish to be part of Great Britain. Your repetition of this lie is either malign influence or total ignorance of the facts on the ground.

  84. 84.

    Jay

    @Gin & Tonic:

    “Peace” be gone,

    unclear if the troll got banned, or if the FSB took them out, shot them and added them to a mass grave for weak ass trolling.

  86. 86.

    Andrya

    @Bruce K in ATH-GR:  Your comment is fair.  As an older child and teenager I had the privilege of hearing, at length and firsthand, the WW1 experiences of my grandfather (British army) and the grocer around the corner (tsarist army).  Both had what today we would call PTSD, and both emphasized the utter futility of the carnage.

  87. 87.

    Chris

    @Andrya:

    Churchill is that archetypical guy who was only right about one thing in his entire life, but it was a pretty important fucking thing.

    (Okay, “one thing” is probably giving him too little credit, but there’s no denying that the dude is one giant ball of what the kids these days would call “problematic.”)

Comments are closed.