A quick housekeeping note. Rosie had her fourth treatment of round three today. Which is the last treatment of round three. In two weeks she’ll start round four. Right now she’s up on the couch resting. Thank you all for the good thoughts, well wishes, prayers, and donations.
As air raid alerts go up and down all over Ukraine, as is the case every night around midnight local time in Ukraine, we find out that Britain asked the US – that’s Britain not Ukraine – for permission a month ago to allow Ukraine to use storm shadow missiles against legitimate military targets in Russia. And over a month later they are still waiting on an answer from the Biden administration because the request is “stuck within the system.”
❗️🇺🇸🇬🇧🇺🇦 The UK has formally asked the Biden Admin to stop prohibiting Ukraine from using Storm Shadow to strike Russian territory!
Over a month later, they are still waiting for a response.
Washington is in effect blocking Britain from allowing Kyiv to fire Storm Shadow missiles inside Russia, amid fears in the Biden administration of an escalation in the Ukraine war.
As pressure grows on the West to relax its rules around the use of long range weapons, Britain is waiting for US approval before it gives the Ukrainians the green light. However, the request went into the system more than a month ago and officials are still waiting, a UK government source said.
They said their understanding was that the topic was effectively “stuck in their system”. A second UK government source confirmed that “discussions were still ongoing around Storm Shadow with allies” and a third defence source described it as “routine US process”.
It is understood that although the UK wants to give Ukraine the freedom to do what they want with the long-range weapon, it requires consensus from allies, including the US, France and a third undisclosed Nato country. A government source stressed that the UK was not blaming the US for any delay, adding that such policy changes took time.
Storm Shadows can fire at targets more than 155 miles away and could be used to hit military bases deeper inside Russia that have been crucial for Moscow’s war effort inside Ukraine.
Sabrina Singh, the deputy spokeswoman for the US department of defence admitted in a briefing on Thursday that the US was “worried about escalation” when it came to Ukraine’s use of long range strikes.
She also suggested long range weapons were not needed to help Ukraine liberate its territory.
I’m going to break in here to explain that Ms. Singh is a professional campaign communications advisor who has worked for Mike Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns and has no actual military experience whatsoever.
Matthew Palmer, chargé d’affaires of the US to the UK, in a Times Radio interview to be broadcast on Sunday, distanced himself from the notion that the US had any say in the matter, saying that the terms under which UK weapons could be used were a matter for London and Kyiv. “I’m not going to insert myself into that conversation,” he told Theo Usherwood.
Me again: Ambassador Palmer is a very bad liar.
One theory inside the UK military is that the US may be waiting to assess the impact or the consequences of the Ukrainian operation into Russia before making a decision, although they said they expected the matter to be quickly resolved.
A member of Ukraine’s defence committee told The Times that Ukraine had been forced to undertake its cross-border operation into Kursk due to the West’s refusal to allow Kyiv to use long-range cruise missiles on targets in Russia.
President Zelensky has repeatedly requested permission to use American-donated ATACMS and British Storm Shadows to strike targets deep within Russia, but each time has been rebuffed over fears that it could lead to an escalation in the conflict.
Solomiia Bobrovska, a Ukrainian MP, said that Russian gains made on the eastern front since the start of this year could have been stopped had Ukraine been able to use these weapons to destroy military and logistics targets deep behind the frontlines.
The assault on the Russian region of Kursk, now entering its 12th day, she said, was a defensive action necessitated by Russia’s incremental but steady progress, and the continual aerial attacks on its civilians who live in cities close to the border, such as Sumy and Kharkiv.
Bobrovska last week returned from Washington where she was representing the Ukrainian parliament’s defence and security committee to press American senators and congressmen to allow for the use of ATACMS.
“If we had been allowed to use these long-range missiles in Russia, we would have been able to prevent a lot of their attacks and offensive operations,” she said. “And I truly believe that the map now would be like it was in 2023, or even better.”
She said that Britain and the US’s refusal to grant permission amounted to a “betrayal” of the security guarantees that Ukraine was given as part of the Budapest memorandum in 1994 in return for destroying the nuclear weapons left in the country following the collapse of the Soviet Union.
“The West promised to protect us, and yet now every day we find ourselves having to prove why we need these long-range weapons in order to protect ourselves,” she said.
President Zelensky suggested to The Guardian in May that in reality Downing Street was waiting on the Americans to give their approval.
A final decision by the UK and other partners depended on “consensus”, with the position in Washington being crucial, he suggested. “You know how it works,” he added.
Colby Badhwar, an independent military analyst, told The Times: “The Biden administration continues to maintain their policy that Ukraine is not permitted to use long range fires to strike deep into Russia; a prohibition that applies not just to the American ATACMS, but the British Storm Shadow as well.”
More at the link.
For want of a nail!!!!
I mean lets be honest here, Secretary Blinken cooked the NSM-20 report to Congress so that the Biden administration could still sell and transfer weapons to Israel. Bibi recklessly escalates solely to protect his political position and to keep his tuchas out of prison, while continuously ratfucking the ceasefire for hostage release negotiations making it easy for Hamas to reject every proposal, and our response is to put two carrier strike groups and an entire USAF air wing into the region to protect the Israelis from their mad self declared king and his messianically delusional extremist ministers who are in the process of setting fire to the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Harem al Sharif/Temple Mount and the Israeli-Jordanian peace agreement as a result. The Ukrainians beg us to let them use long range weapons to strike legitimate military targets in Russia that are attacking civilian targets – people, homes, the energy generation and transmission grid, Ukrainian granaries, schools, supermarkets, parks – and it’s whoa there buckaroo, cool your jets, let’s not be doing anything hasty.
Here is President Zelenskyy’s address from earlier today at the meeting of the Heads of Ukraine’s Foreign Diplomatic Missions “Wartime Diplomacy: Resilience, Weapons, Victory” conference. Video below, English transcript after the jump.
Our Collective Efforts Determine What Weapons Are in the Hands of Our Warriors – Speech by the President at the Meeting of Heads of Ukraine’s Foreign Diplomatic Missions “Wartime Diplomacy: Resilience, Weapons, Victory”
19 August 2024 – 20:00
Dear Mr. Prime Minister, esteemed Ministers, honored attendees, fellow Diplomats!
Our meeting today is taking place at a time for which all of us, Ukrainians, have been working. It is the time when the world is shedding its last and very naive illusions about Russia. Illusions that have significantly hindered the defense of Ukraine.
Now we have most convincingly confirmed with our actions what we should have done earlier, what we have been speaking about for a long time.
Ukrainian warriors continue the defensive operation in the designated areas of the Kursk region. As of today, our forces control over 1,250 square kilometers of the enemy’s territory and 92 settlements. The strengthening of our positions, the stabilization of designated areas, and the replenishment of the exchange fund for Ukraine are ongoing. In general, this operation has become our largest investment in the process of liberating Ukrainians from Russian captivity – we have already captured the largest number of Russian prisoners in a single operation, and this is a significant result, this is one of our goals, and our actions continue.
And of course, we cannot yet speak publicly about the units involved in the designated areas of the Kursk region. But I am grateful to every unit. I would like to thank our heroes on behalf of all of us. At present, the Russian border area opposite our Sumy region has been mostly cleared of Russian military presence. And this is also one of our operation’s goals, tactical goals.
Just a few months ago, many people around the world, if they had heard that we were planning such an operation like the one in the Kursk region, would have said that it was impossible and that it would cross the strictest of all the red lines that Russia has. That is why, actually, no one knew about our preparations. And now our warriors’ real success speaks for itself – our active defensive actions across border as well as Putin’s inability to defend his territory from such defensive actions of ours are very telling. Our proactive, preventive defense is the most effective counter to Russian terror, causing significant difficulties for the aggressor state. And secondly, we are now witnessing a significant ideological shift, namely, the whole naive, illusory concept of so-called red lines regarding Russia, which dominated the assessment of the war by some partners, has crumbled these days somewhere near Sudzha. When our Ukrainian defenders of life act just like this, strongly, bravely and when an operation is really well-prepared, Putin has no options left. And now the world sees that it is true, that it really works – not only in the temporarily occupied territory of our state, but also in the territory of Russia itself. The world sees that everything in this war depends solely on courage – ours and our partners’. On courageous decisions for Ukraine, on courage in supporting Ukraine, and on courageous steps – and not only our steps. It is important that our partners are in sync with us in their determination, and then Russia will have no choice but to make a just peace. We must force Russia, with all our might and together with our partners, to make peace.
Dear Ukrainian Diplomats!
Your primary task is to promote courage. I expect you to continue convincing our partners to support Ukraine – to the maximum. Support in such a way that there is no shortage of this kind of bravery in anything. Such shortages of bravery are why Putin still seeks ways to prolong the war instead of peace. And this is not a question of years or decades – when reliable peace can be restored for our entire land and all our people. It is only a matter of decisions, ours and those made together with our partners, that is, the current political generation of the world – leaders who are now working in those countries that truly wish to live without wars and in accordance with international law must make these decisions.
So, first – Long-range capabilities.
If our partners lifted all the current restrictions on the use of weapons on Russian territory, we would not need to physically enter particularly the Kursk region to protect our Ukrainian citizens in the border communities and eliminate Russia’s potential for aggression. But for now, we cannot use all the weapons at our disposal and eliminate Russian terrorists where they are. Russian military bases, and Russian military airfields, Russian logistics and other military facilities, whose existence allows Putin to evade the search for peace, are legitimate targets for our Defense Forces. And everyone should understand that this is important in terms of all areas of combat operations and protection against all forms of Russian terrorist activity. We need sufficient range to defend Ukraine from Russian missiles and guided aerial bombs, to prevent the transfer of Russian troops, and to counter the occupier’s pressure on key frontlines. Now, between this hall and Pokrovsk and Toretsk, where the fiercest Russian assaults are ongoing, there are about 200 kilometers. Here, the roar of artillery or the approach of enemy drones cannot be heard. But you should feel both: here and in the capitals where you work, that Ukraine is separated from halting the advance of the Russian army on the front by only one decision we await from our partners: the decision on long-range capabilities. Now, this is a key defense decision that should support our warriors. And it primarily concerns the work of our Diplomats, you, and other Ukrainian representatives in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and in those countries that can either make the decision themselves or influence partners to resolve the issue of long-range capabilities. I emphasize that the format of Putin’s response to the operation in the Kursk region demonstrates that there is no single rational reason to deny us true power, true long-range capabilities. And the situation on the Donetsk front is such that any further delay by our partners in terms of long-range capabilities is becoming de facto, perhaps, the most effective support for Russia’s offensive potential.
Second – Sanctions.
I want to thank every country, every leader, and every political force in partner states that defends the necessity of truly strong sanctions against Russia for this war. But just as buffer zones in ground battles are dynamic structures that ensure the clearing of enemy military presence in designated areas, and when the area is clear, the targets are shifted, the sanctions shield must be capable of responding to present threats, responding here and now, and to their updates. The sanctions already imposed by the world have indeed significantly restricted the economy and capabilities of Putin’s regime. Thanks to this, time is working to limit the aggression. However, the shadow tanker fleet of Russia has become a new challenge. Russia’s relations with certain regimes, such as those in Pyongyang and Tehran, create new sources of threats, and not only for us in Ukraine. Russia’s nuclear industry is still being used by Moscow to maintain its spheres of influence in the world. The Russian banking sector still maintains connections with the global system. These and other factors require the expansion of the sanctions shield – extending sanctions to new areas that enable Russia to sustain its military activities. And your task is to be advocates for sanctions decisions.
Third – Long-term agreements with partners.
I want to thank everyone on our state team working with partners on long-term support programs for Ukraine. This includes military support – regular formation and delivery of defense packages – as well as financial, political support, and support for our joint productions, particularly in the defense-industrial complex. You all know that we can produce significantly more drones than we currently have the means to fund. We are also continuously ramping up our production of Ukrainian artillery. We are working on ammunition production. And these are the topics you have to discuss with our partners – you have to secure investments. And this is a key task. Now the budgetary processes will be underway in the countries where you work, and your task is to convince our partners of the need for further investment in our common security. And it is important that you maintain focus on timely logistics, so that announced support packages for Ukraine are felt promptly enough on the front lines and in the formation of our army reserves. Unfortunately, logistics currently face delays, this is a fact, and particularly regarding agreements with our leading partners, starting with the United States. Additionally, we have a set of bilateral security agreements with our partners, and each of them must be fully realized, especially regarding annual financial commitments. I expect that the system of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will be an effective executor of state policy in all these areas. Another task you have is to involve the Governments, international organizations, and regional leaders of the countries where you work, as well as their companies, in Ukraine’s reconstruction. This is one of the key criteria for determining the effectiveness of each Ambassador. Ukraine needs specific projects from each country where you work.
Fourth – The Global Ukrainian Community.
This is a rather painful issue today. Just as every state has a geographic center, the Ukrainian state must be the real center for our now global Ukrainian nation. Our people are present in every part of the world, in most countries. These are diasporas of different times, various waves of migration. In some parts of the world, there are more Ukrainians, in others, there are fewer, but we must recognize our nation as a global one because this is the reality. Therefore, we need to modernize our state institutions, so they align with the current task of uniting all Ukrainians around Ukraine, around the defense of Ukraine, and around strengthening our position in the world. I believe that to achieve this, we must enhance our institutional presence in partner countries. This will be done in two ways. First, we have already decided to open new consulates of Ukraine abroad, including in Poland, Germany, Bulgaria, Italy, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and France. Some of them are additional, some of them are the first in history, but this is very important – wherever there are Ukrainians, wherever Ukrainian communities need more attention. Along with this, and along with the usual work through the system of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, we have discussed this with the Prime Minister, we are preparing to launch a new institution that will ensure sufficient strength of global Ukrainian unity. Millions of our people in other countries, their ties and relations with Ukraine, the protection of our shared interests as a nation – all this will be the responsibility of the new institution. Basically, it should be the Ministry of Ukrainian Unity and Countering Russian Influence on Ukrainians. First of all, abroad. We all see Russia using a massive propaganda resource abroad, especially targeting Ukrainians. We see how many aspects of the spiritual independence of our people are not settled and how Russia is using its own church structures for agent work and spreading discord. We also recognize that the educational, cultural, and informational needs of Ukrainians in other countries require greater activity from our state. And this is a fundamentally new task for Ukraine – we have never before had such a large part of our nation abroad. I believe that the system of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine cannot handle this task alone. Because we are talking about millions of our Ukrainians. It also would be wrong to simply expect various ministries and departments to carry out their respective tasks on their own. We need an institution that will lead other state institutions towards these defined goals. We will present all the details in the near future.
And the fifth task, which is important to mention right now in the run-up to the fall, is the Peace Summit.
The inaugural Summit was, in my opinion, an extraordinary success for Ukraine. I am grateful to everyone who worked to make our Summit happen. Now we are preparing for the second Peace Summit, and we must work to ensure that it takes place this year. We must do everything for this. We need to continue expanding the circle of support for the Communiqué of the inaugural first Summit. Every Ambassador of Ukraine whose host country has not yet joined the Communiqué should draw the appropriate conclusions. We also require the most energetic work with our partners in the groups on the points of the Peace Formula, and this is not just something purely political. We need to work more actively with the media to ensure that the Peace Formula has consistent and sufficient support. We need to work with analytical centers in different countries, in the countries where you work, so that our vision of a just peace is understood. We need to be able to work with all kinds of important political forces, societies and leaders of these societies in different countries, and not only in our partner countries. The blue and yellow colors of our Ukrainian statehood and Ukrainian courage are a desirable symbol for many people in the world. The symbol that people want to stand close to. I expect that your work will add meaningful content to the power of our national colors.
And a few more specific tasks.
Euro-Atlantic – every representative of Ukraine should work to strengthen the understanding that NATO will be complete only with Ukraine as a member.
European Union – the negotiation process must be as dynamic as Ukraine needs it to be.
Black Sea Region – we must work with all our partners to ensure this region is free from the Russian military threat. Initiatives such as Grain from Ukraine, the Crimea Platform, and bilateral cooperation in the region must be strengthened.
Africa – we need strong partnerships with those who respect international law. Ukraine needs economic interaction with Africa, security interaction, as well as direct diplomatic work, particularly through the format of the Ukraine-Africa Forum, which must take place. And I look forward to it.
Latin America – there are some very good results in our work with countries like Chile and Argentina, with the Caribbean states. We must increase our cooperation, and it is the task of the respective Ambassadors and the staff of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine to realize our initiative of holding a Ukraine-Latin America Summit.
Japan – we have achieved a true strategic partnership, and we must make this model of relations exemplary.
The entire Asian and Pacific region is now one of the centers of events that will determine the shape of the next decades. Ukraine has its own view on global development, and it should be exclusively peaceful development within the framework of the rules-based world order. Ukraine is ready to contribute to the relevant processes as a security donor and a defender of the international order. We will strengthen our diplomatic presence in the Asian region.
Ladies and Gentlemen!
Dear Ukrainian Diplomats!
I am grateful to all of you who are truly working, with all your might, for our state and people. And we must all maintain our energy – fighting for victories for Ukraine and defending the interests of Ukrainians. Our collective efforts determine what weapons are in the hands of our warriors, what ambitions Ukraine can achieve, and what future awaits our state and Ukrainians. Every day defines what Ukraine will be tomorrow. Please, do not waste a single day. Everything for the sake of Ukraine.
Ville Mykkänen from Finland died defending Ukraine. He was a volunteer who joined the Ukrainian Army in late autumn of 2023.
“He had a strong will to defend a free nation. In the end, under the fighting name “Flurry,” he made the greatest sacrifice anyone could ever make, losing… pic.twitter.com/BO8kTXyxi5
Ville Mykkänen from Finland died defending Ukraine. He was a volunteer who joined the Ukrainian Army in late autumn of 2023.
“He had a strong will to defend a free nation. In the end, under the fighting name “Flurry,” he made the greatest sacrifice anyone could ever make, losing his life for freedom. Dying in the merciless battles on the front line is a testament to the values he cherished until the last moment: courage, bravery and justice,” the family statement said.
Deepest condolences to the Hero’s family. Eternal memory.
Nataliia, call sign “Cobra,” has been a medic in the National Guard of Ukraine for 28 years. As a member of the 17th Brigade, she has regularly helped Defenders in the most difficult conditions on the front line.
Nataliia, call sign “Cobra,” has been a medic in the National Guard of Ukraine for 28 years. As a member of the 17th Brigade, she has regularly helped Defenders in the most difficult conditions on the front line.
Her experience and dedication continue to save the lives of Ukrainian Warriors. She remains at the front lines working in the medical service, fulfilling her mission with unwavering confidence and determination.
📹: 17th Brigade
Denmark:
Denmark announced DKK 783 million ($116 million) of military support for Ukraine.
This is Denmark’s 20th military donation package, and it will provide Ukraine with much-needed military equipment.
This package allocates DKK 112 million to finance equipment donations through the… pic.twitter.com/joG5SRrNHN
Denmark announced DKK 783 million ($116 million) of military support for Ukraine.
This is Denmark’s 20th military donation package, and it will provide Ukraine with much-needed military equipment.
This package allocates DKK 112 million to finance equipment donations through the Ukrainian defense industry.
We are grateful to our Danish friends for their unwavering support!
Together, we are stronger!
🇺🇦🤝🇩🇰
Germany:
Germany provided a new military aid package for Ukraine. We are grateful to our German friends for their unwavering support in our fight against russian invaders.
🇺🇦🤝🇩🇪
The package includes:
◾️1 IRIS-T SLS air defense system
◾️14,000 rounds 155mm ammunition
◾️10 unmanned… pic.twitter.com/r861M2VbrB
Germany provided a new military aid package for Ukraine. We are grateful to our German friends for their unwavering support in our fight against russian invaders.
🇺🇦🤝🇩🇪
The package includes:
◾️1 IRIS-T SLS air defense system
◾️14,000 rounds 155mm ammunition
◾️10 unmanned surface vessels
◾️26 Vector reconnaissance drones
◾️6 High Mobility Engineer Excavators
◾️1 Bergepanzer 2 armored recovery vehicle with spare parts
◾️55,000 first aid kits
◾️70 MK 556 assault rifles
◾️10 HLR 338 precision rifles
◾️50 CR 308 rifles
◾️Material for explosive ordnance disposal
— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) August 19, 2024
A fundamental difference between the two belligerents. Ukraine’s government has openly said it isn’t interested in long-term occupation in Kursk. Russia’s government, in Ukraine, is renaming towns, changing school syllabi, abducting children & annexing territory. https://t.co/ytG9lkLOsL
Ukraine has destroyed a third bridge over the Seym River in the Kursk region, as part of an apparent attempt to expand what President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has described as a military “buffer zone” inside Russia.
According to Russian officials, the bridge in the village of Karyzh was damaged overnight by targeted Ukrainian “shelling”. It was the last major crossing on this part of the front, following the destruction on Friday and Saturday of two bridges further east over the same river.
Ukraine’s armed forces are now poised to push forward from their existing bridgehead around the Russian town of Sudzha, captured two weeks ago during a surprise offensive. They are seeking to encircle Russian troops – some of them conscripts – who are stuck south of the river in the Korenevsky district.
If the operation succeeds, Ukraine will gain another 700 sq km (270 sq miles) of Russian land. Russia has built pontoon bridges across the river in order to supply its forces, but these are vulnerable to close-range Ukrainian strikes from US-supplied Himars systems, truck-mounted mobile rocket launchers.
On Monday Kyiv captured two more Russian villages, Snagost and Apanasovka. The pace of its advance into Kursk oblast has slowed in recent days, however. The Kremlin has scrambled reserves to try to stop Ukrainian combat units from advancing further.
“The situation is messy there,” a senior Ukrainian official told the Guardian. “The Russians have pulled in extra troops. Some are capable, some are not. The Russians have found it extremely difficult to recapture lost territory.”
Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, Oleksandr Syrskyi, was waging a “high-speed” campaign, with his troops constantly on the move, the official said. Syrskyi wanted to avoid a dug-in “positional war”, similar to the one taking place in eastern Ukraine, the person said, adding: “It’s risky. But the narrative of the war has changed. Everything is possible.”
While Ukrainian forces have made quick progress around Sudzha, Russian troops have been steadily making gains in the east of Ukraine. On Monday they captured the town of Niu-York, raising the Russian flag and renaming the town Novgorodske, Kremlin military bloggers reported.
For months, Russian forces have also been edging closer to the Ukrainian city of Pokrovsk, gobbling up surrounding villages. Ukrainian defenders have retreated in the face of airstrikes on their positions, followed by round-the-clock infantry assaults.
On Monday Pokrovsk’s military administrator, Serhii Dobryak, said fighting was likely to engulf the city in less than two weeks. He urged residents to pack up and leave. About 60% had already gone, he said. He added that families with children would soon be forced to evacuate under emergency rules.
In neighbouring Myrnohrad – now just a few kilometres from the frontline – fewer than 16,000 people remained. Banks, pharmacies, shops and markets were closing, together with all organisations and institutions. The city hospital was shutting down as well, with the exception of a few doctors who would treat the wounded.
The imminent Russian attack on Pokrovsk will complicate Ukraine’s attempts to defend its Donbas region, where war has raged since 2014. The Russians are close to capturing a highway that links Pokrovsk to a string of major cities to the north, including the garrison settlements of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk.
The Kursk raid was conceived in part as a way to relieve pressure on Pokrovsk and the city of Toretsk, also under intense Russian fire. So far, though, the Kremlin has transferred irregular forces from the rear, as well as units based in the occupied south of Ukraine. If anything, it has thrown more resources into the battle for Pokrovsk.
Speaking on Sunday, Zelenskiy said Ukraine’s military incursion into Russia was carried out to create a permanent buffer zone. It would prevent further attacks by Moscow across the border, he suggested, after a Russian offensive in May against the Ukrainian city of Vovchansk. Fighting there continues.
Previously Zelenskiy said the incursion would protect communities in Ukraine’s bordering Sumy region from constant shelling. “It is now our primary task in defensive operations overall to destroy as much Russian war potential as possible and conduct maximum counteroffensive actions. This includes creating a buffer zone on the aggressor’s territory – our operation in the Kursk region,” he declared.
More at the link.
Sumy Oblast:
– One commander mentioned that the Kursk operation is moving forward thanks to weapons supplied by Ukraine’s partners, who trust in Ukraine’s ability to defend the country.
– F-16s are helping a lot, but Ukraine definitely needs more to keep advancing. 2/👇🏻
Spent the weekend with Ukrainian military in the border area of Sumy. Here are some key highlights from the Kursk operation:
– Ukrainian morale is high, and troops are eager to push forward.
– Many young Russian conscripts are surrendering fast, and they’ve also captured Kadyrovites, who are said to ‘never surrender.’ All POWs are treated with full respect.
1/👇🏻
– Civilians remaining in the border villages said Russia constantly attacked their villages before the operation and they fully support further action in Kursk.
A Russian unit “Rusich” with a swastika on their emblem announced a human sacrifice of a Ukrainian POW (“preferably a brown person”) to “please Slavic gods”. Will we see headlines at @nytimes@tagesschau@lemondefr? pic.twitter.com/BKl0jaNMip
Russian neo-nazi unit Rusich (the one that published the pic of a beheaded & dismembered 🇺🇦 PoW last week) asked other units to share an alive PoW for human sacrifice on the occasion of some Slavic fest. “Preferably of non-Slavic descent…”.#RussianWarCrimes#StandWithUkrainepic.twitter.com/P9NTkUgJwo
When Ukrainian soldiers make even the slightest misstep, you cover it extensively.
Yet, when a russian neo-Nazi unit openly requests a person of color prisoner of war for human sacrifice, where are your articles? pic.twitter.com/YGzpjs67d6
And I am serious
I just found out recently about that.
Obviously there is no English article about Kharkiv specifically, but here is a Spanish one.https://t.co/nWVhgkIhB0
For example Kazakhstan is one of the countries which suffered the most from soviet nuclear experiments. The lake you see is the result of nuclear tests.
You can watch with auto-translated captions
PS this is Ukrainian channel but making some reports in russian, and oh my, how I hate the way the narrator speaks, typical russian style. I get it’s for russian speakers and russians and made the way that they feel comfy just as like…
PS this is Ukrainian channel but making some reports in russian, and oh my, how I hate the way the narrator speaks, typical russian style. I get it’s for russian speakers and russians and made the way that they feel comfy just as like they watch russian tv 🫠
https://youtu.be/XtuzT5UbMwk?si=HzE6gJnRRywaDWFf
Amazing the things that authoritarians think they can nuke into submission. Oil well fires, hurricanes, etc, etc.
Rostov Oblast, Russia:
🧯A video from firefighters: burning oil depot in the Rostov region.
❗️Due to the high danger, the extinguishing was suspended – it is impossible to get to the source of the fire. pic.twitter.com/L2fdnJlkT2
Timelapse of the Proletarsk oil depot fire in 5 @planet satellite images: July 26 (pre-strike) – Aug. 16, 6:19 UTC – Aug. 18, 8:20 UTC – Aug. 19, 8:18 UTC – Aug. 19, 11:23 UTC. pic.twitter.com/bxmRgO9B4N
These pictures bring us way closer to a REAL ’embargo’ on Russian strikes on Ukraine’s critical infrastructure than any sort of “don’t resist, sit down, don’t provoke Putin, god forbid he gets upset, just play along, just beg for mercy and humbly wait.” pic.twitter.com/7AIqt8CmGE
If the U.S. is going to be bureaucratic assholes about this, then just ignore them. The British gave the weapons to the Ukrainians and if keeping the U.S. in the loop hinders the war effort then piss on ’em. Hit the targets you want and ignore American sputtering. I don’t think the U.S. will actually do anything punitive, and in the meantime you’ve destroyed some Russian bombers.
If Luke Harding is correct that Ukraine has “captured” Apanasovka and Snagost (as opposed to merely fighting there) then there would seem to be a good chance that they will be in Koronevo in a few days, hopefully taking over the crossroads there. That would be pretty. At that point they’d completely control the local road net, and could deal with encircled troops at leisure, while beginning to entrench and waiting for the Russians to pop the stick from their ass and try to do something about it. Which now looks like September, at the earliest, and the longer they wait the harder its going to be for them to accomplish anything without decanting their Donetsk force into Kursk wholesale.
Syrsky has his limitations, but this is a well-conceived and well-executed operation.
Keeping you and Rosie very close in my thoughts. Happy to chip in more if/when you need help.
I read your dispatches every night, but I am too emotional to comment. My DIL’s piano professor/mentor is from Ukraine. In her small apartment she and her husband have their autistic son and her sister and children living with them while her BIL is home and fighting in the army. My son and DIL do what she will accept to help. She is very proud.
Thank you for bearing witness day after painful day.
@Bill K: The British don’t need “permission” to give the go-ahead on Storm Shadow use. They either want an excuse not to do so while appearing to be in favor, or they want political cover for doing so. If they really thought the Pentagon and the NSC would turn this kind of decision around by return of mail, they’d be idiots. They are not idiots. They just don’t want to be blamed for any consequences that may arise.
The issue with the SCALP’s, StormShadows and Taurus missiles, is that Ukraine can’t program in target destinations. There is a small French Airforce team in Ukraine that does the target programming.
Blinken’s statement baffled some Israeli officials who told me that Netanyahu’s hard lines are actually making a deal much harder to reach
At this point, I think the blame lies less w/ Blinken than w/ Biden, who is driving the US policies toward Israel & the ME in general, & that set of policies have been detached from reality since the early days of the Administration.
There are US Export controlled components and software in the SCALP’s, StormShadow and Taurus missiles, that are also part of the replacement and upgrade programs for those missiles.
The US can bring consequences if they want.
Will they?
Hard to say, France, Italy, Lesser Brexitania. and Germany are no Israel.
Mykola Kuleba
@MykolaKuleba
11h
A shocking news story from temporarily occupied #Luhansk reveals that due to the mobilization carried out by the occupiers, even 14-year-old teenagers are now being recruited at the local locomotive factory. #Children who have just finished 8th grade are forced to perform heavy and dangerous work due to a severe labor shortage caused by the mobilization of adult workers.
It is a blatant violation of international law, particularly the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which explicitly prohibits forced labor of children. Article 32 of the #Convention emphasizes that every child must be protected from economic exploitation and from work that is dangerous or harmful to their health and well-being.
The war has already forced many children in Ukraine to grow up too quickly. But #russian occupiers deliberately continue to steal their childhood, turning them into a resource to fulfill their criminal ambitions. Children should not be working in factories, especially in conditions of war and occupation, where their lives are already under constant threat.
We strongly condemn these actions by russia in the occupied territories and call on the international community to pay attention to this crime against Ukrainian children. Every child has the right to a safe and happy childhood, and we must do everything possible to protect them from exploitation and violence.
ChrisO_wiki
@ChrisO_wiki
16h • 31 tweets • 8 min read • Read on X
1/ Russian conscripts are now fighting, dying and being captured in large numbers in Ukraine’s Kursk offensive. As this is the first time that conscripts have been a significant factor in the war, let’s look at who the conscripts are and why so many have surrendered. ⬇️
Just a shout-out to Solomiia Bobrovska, the MP quoted in the Times piece. She is one of those who represents the best of modern Ukraine – well-educated, well-traveled in the West, comfortable in English, thoughtful and precise, scrupulously honest – and only 34. There are more like her in the Verkhovna Rada, just not a critical mass yet, unfortunately. My dear wife and I know several of them personally, including Solomiia.
Intrestingly, some of these MP’s were brought into politics by Sviatoslav Vakarchuk, leader of the popular musical group Okean Elzy.
@Carlo Graziani: We told the Ukrainians you’re a stickler for road junctions, cross roads, and rail heads. They’ve dedicated this cross border offensive just for you.
More seriously, as for Syrskyi, sometimes being very detail oriented is a good thing.
@YY_Sima Qian: I read the Israeli news every day. I follow the X accounts of Noga Tarnopolsky, Ravid, Roi Kais, and half a dozen others on a regular basis. Go read Eran Etzion’s feed. You’ll need to machine translate it. The Israelis, even the ones that are right of center, are astounded at Biden and his people’s naivete. And because the US media doesn’t cover anything that’s actually going on, no one in the US knows that 10s of thousands of Israelis are in the streets every weeknight and hundreds of thousands are in the streets every weekend demonstrating against Bibi, Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and demanding a ceasefire. Or that Bibi and his extremist coalition is still pushing the coup to remake Israel into a national-religious kleptocracy.
I (who have no military knowledge whatsoever) see this as a lesson for other countries to learn. Have your own defence industries. So that no one can dictate what you can, and more importantly, cannot do with your weapons that you bought to defend yourself. If countries won’t sell weapons with no strings attached (I do understand why this is so, even if I don’t entirely agree), then you need to build the weapons yourself. Many countries could find themselves in conflicts in the same position as UA. Especially if protection agreements (Budapest) or treaties mean nothing.
@YY_Sima Qian: I’d been looking but no reports about whether Bibi announced he agreed with Blinken’s proposal…in English or in Hebrew. I’m guessing from the report that Bibi was using English.
@Adam L Silverman: I was reading a Business Insider article that UA has now taken out the primary bridges in the Kursk region preventing resupply and reinforcements to remaining orcs. Seems like a twist on the Kherson Offensive. Rather than fake an attack, blow the bridges behind the Russians and then sweep up the encircled Russians, the UA may have actually attacked the Russians to get within range of taking out key bridges, and are now attacking encircled Russians.
OT: Yesterday, Subsole asked about the PRC’s approach to arms exports, & implications on their potential effectiveness in actual warfare (especially a high intensity scenario over Taiwan). What follows will be characteristically verbose, so please bear w/ me :-) (I don’t need to remind everyone that I am just a rank amateur w/ some interest on the subject):
I think it is beneficial to emphasize that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) origin, ethos & institutional culture remain largely that of a revolution force w/ insurgent roots, that for most of its history it had confronted, & fought from, positions of immense disadvantage in both manpower (qty) & materiel (qty & quality) against its long series of opponents (the warlord armies, the KMT regime’s National Revolutionary Army, the Imperial Japanese Army & its various Chinese puppet forces, the UN forces in Korea, the Soviet Army, the Republic of China Navy & Air Force, the USN/USAF, etc.). The only opponent where the PLA had parity w/ was the Indian Army in ’62. The only opponent the PLA was advantaged in manpower & materiel was the Vietnamese Army in ’79 (& the series of intense border clashes through the ensuing decade). This experience meant that the PLA has historically emphasized force (at least regular force) preservation in its operational doctrine & combat tactics (though not shying from casualties to achieve objectives), & emphasized build quality in its arms production/procurement (though quality in design & level of technological sophistication had historically been huge limiting factors).
Serious Western scholars of the PLA (who are few & far in between) have long noted how much of a learning organization it has demonstrated to being over the course of its history, because it had to, much more so than the Soviet military & more so than the US military (which takes qualitative advantage for granted, & since the end of the Cold War quantitative advantage, too). Historically, the PLA had allowed significant latitude for lower echelon officers & even foot soldiers to take their own initiative w/in its meticulous planning, despite not having a professional NCO corps (because until post-’62 the PLA had always been such a battle hardened force up & down its ranks, & had not yet been damaged by the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution). Until the ’00s, it was not unusual for PRC weapons to be poorly designed, but if they were ever poorly manufactured (especially for PLA’s use) it was due to limitations in the production/fabrication process & not a lackadaisical attitude. In many ways, this is the direct opposite of the Soviet experience.
Due to both falling out w/ the USSR in the late ’50s, & the decade of technological stagnation during the GPCR, the arms that the PRC provided to its allies (such North Vietnam, Albania, & communist liberation movements across the Third World) during the mid- to late Cold War were functional w/ decent build quality, but decidedly unsophisticated, & technologically increasingly obsolescent/obsolete as the time went on. The armor, aircraft & artillery pieces that the PRC sold to both Iraq & Iran in the 80s were obviously obsolescent even then (compared to Western & Soviet gear of the time), but were nevertheless more advanced than the gear the PLA had to make do w/ until military modernization gathered pace in the late ’00s. Nevertheless, the PLA’s gear were generally well made & well maintained, even during the ’80s & ’90s when it was starved of funding as the CPC regime overwhelmingly prioritized economic and scientific/technological development.
Since the early ’10s, the pace of the PRC’s military & MIC modernization has accelerated at an extraordinary pace, built on the foundation of the PRC’s extraordinarily growing economy & immense (still extraordinarily growing) industrial base. The warships & submarines (some used & refurbished) the PRC sold to Pakistan, Bangladesh & Thailand in the ’90s & ’00s remain very functional (assuming good maintenance), an indirect sign of their build quality. More modern warships, submarines, warplanes, drones, artillery pieces & armor had been sold to countries in South Asia, SE Asia, MENA, & West Africa in the ’10s, the customers often come back for more, & the gears have been used extensively in civil wars & counterinsurgency campaigns (along side Russian & Western made weapons), to good effect. Both Saudi Arabia & the UAE had bought large numbers of artillery pieces & armed drones from the PRC, which were used widely in Yemen & Libya. The KSA bought the DF-3 IRBMs from the PRC in the ’80s (when the KSA still recognized the ROC & not the PRC) for a long range strike capability to potentially threaten both Israel & Iran, that have now been replaced by DF-21 IRBMs. Pakistan used to insist on integrating Western electronics, radars and fire control systems (FCSs) into the PRC designed tanks, fighters & warships that it bough or produced under license. Over the past decade, it has been adopting Chinese electronics, radars & FCSs on the newer Chinese designed platforms it has been acquiring. Since the early ’00s it had been noted that PRC license produced versions of the Su-27 fighters had noticeably better build quality than Russian made ones, due to the former’s investment in acquiring Western software & hardware, as well as adopting Western manufacturing processes. All of these indirectly suggest that Chinese arms are competitive on the global market against Russian, South Korean & Western vendors, since most of these customers have many other options they can choose from. As the PLA rapidly modernized, the export models became slightly downgraded in performance, or were models that had lost out in the domestic competition for PLA tenders. These days, the PRC does not offer its most advanced platforms (stealth aircraft, stealthy destroyers/cruisers, latest gen nuclear attack submarines, latest gen MRBMs/IRBMs) for export, for the same reasons the US does not offer them for most of its allies & partners.
One additional complication is the emergence of private or quasi-state owned enterprises expanding from civilian markets into arms, w/o the commitment to build quality that characterized the traditional PRC MIC. Since they typically do not supply the PLA, they do not have to meet the PLA’s relatively demanding standards. For export customers who just want things cheap, they can deliver cheaply made products that reflect their prices, just like what we have seen w/ PRC made civilian goods. You can basically purchase products of every quality level from PRC suppliers, at the commensurate (though still competitive or advantaged) price level.
In the ’90s & ’00s, the USN/USAF used to be able to dominate the PLAN/PLAAF in situational awareness, electronic warfare (EW), & offensive prowess right to the PRC’s door step, & were not shy in demonstrating that position of dominance from time to time to “signal deterrence”. Even the RoCN/RoCAF had a noticeable qualitative edge over the PLAN/PLAAF, & the JA”SD”F/JM”SD”F enjoyed decisive qualitative advantage. Over the past decade, the balance of power across the Taiwan Strait & w/in the 1st Island Chain has shifted dramatically. The RoCN/RoCAF are now hopelessly outgunned. Even the USN 7th Fleet is outgunned in the Western Pacific. The JA”SD”F is now at a disadvantage in qty & [on paper] quality, & [on paper] the JM”SD”F has lost the qualitative edge. The EW cat & mouse game w/in the 1st Island Chain is now much more even, & the seas w/in the 1st Island Chain are no longer permissive operating environments for the USN’s SSNs or the JM”SD”F’s SSKs. Outside of the 1st Island Chain & especially outside the range of PLA AShBMs, however, the USN/USAF & JM”SD”F still enjoy overwhelming advantage.
Of course, how the PLA will perform in high intensity warfare will be determined less by the quality of its gear (which is undeniably improving rapidly), & more by the quality of the training & the effectiveness of combat tactics & operational doctrine, & whether they can fully exploit the rapidly improve qty & quality of gear. Since the PLA has not fought a high intensity war since ’79, & has not seen combat operations of any kind since ’88, this is unknowable. Long time observers of the PLA have noted how closely the PLA follow the military developments elsewhere & seek lessons from the wars fought by others & reforms implemented by others. The PLA has seen a series of massive cuts from the early ’80s to ’15, & a series of structural & doctrinal reforms, clearly reflecting the lessons it is taking from the experience observed elsewhere. Exercises have become increasing complex, realistic & large across & integrating all services. The PLANAF/PLAAF pilots now have more flying hours per year than their USN/USAF counterparts. PLA units have noticeably outperformed their Russian counterparts in joint exercises, mainly due to superior organization, tactics & doctrine, rather than superior equipment. The US DoD used to speculate that poor training was a factor in some of the reckless maneuvers that PLAAF/PLAN/PLANAF fighters & warships engaged in during intercepts, in additional to aggressive posturing. Now, they note that PLAAF/PLAN/PLANAF fighters & warships are perfectly capable of “professional” (as the US DoD deems it) intercepts & playing the usual cat & mouse game, & any dangerous maneuvers are calculated to send a message. All of these are indirect hints, & do not answer the question of how the PLA will perform in high intensity warfare, how well the equipment will perform, how effective will the tactics & doctrines be, how well the personnel up & down the ranks will react to the inevitably intense pressure & enormous casualties, & how quickly will the PLA be able to adjust. Until the PLA actually fights a high intensity war, that is unknowable.
Finally, the rapid military modernization of the PLA is happening when the PRC is spending 1.7 – 1.9% of GDP on “national defense” (according to SIPRI & other organizations’ estimates, on a comparable accounting basis to “defense” spending of other powers, official budget of the PRC MoD is 1.2% of GDP), far lower than the US & lower than what the US is pushing its allies to spend. This is not a PRC economy preparing for war. As previously stated, the PLA has not fought since the late ’80s, & the most aggressive actions the PRC has taken are Stone/Iron Age brawls in the Himalayas that its border defense troops occasionally engage in w/ the Indian Army, & the bumper boats & water cannon volleys that the Chinese Coast Guard targets the Filipino Coast Guard w/ in the South China Sea. Aggressive & unjustifiable actions, at least towards the Philippines, but nonetheless a far cry from the military actions every other major power has engaged in over the past 3 decades, certainly relatively to Putinist Russia (or what the US has enabled; then again, in some of these humanitarian disasters the PRC played its part in enabling, too). Something to keep in mind when politicians & think tankers fall prey to moral panic on topic of the Chinese threat.
Countries with advanced weapons capabilities aren’t going to sell the details on how to build the weapons yourself.
It takes a lot of time and resources to build a domestic defense industry.
You need universities capable of training scientists and engineers with the ability to understand the best technical options. You need the precision equipment necessary to make the weapons. You need the natural resources to manufacture weapons on a significant scale. You need the patience for prototypes to go wrong, and corrections made. Also, the surplus money to put into domestic defense production rather than just buying from established makers.
Very few countries possess this on any significant scale. They may have a few domestic weapons systems, fighter planes, etc., but they probably aren’t as sophisticated as Western designs, and not made in any significant numbers.
Adam, I can’t thank you enough for your nightly recaps. Albeit, they’re beyond difficult to read, so I grasp at straws—if Jake Sullivan is the keystone—who above him can overrule him? Who on the inside can derail his appalling approach to global security.
Russia’s red line after red line are crossed and the sky doesn’t fall. Where is Biden’s green line? When does he step up? In a better world, the U.S. would tell Ukraine—once we deliver these weapons—they belong to you to use as you see fit. Only with the caveat that humanitarian & international norms be respected. Sigh.
@way2blue: Ukraine has amply demonstrated that its forces are willing & able to act according to Laws on Armed Conflict & International Humanitarian Laws, even w/ its escalating drone warfare against military & militarily relevant targets w/in Russia, as well as the physical incursion by its ground forces into Russia.
The impulse to exact revenge is an immensely powerful one, & Ukraine is admirably suppressing this impulse.
All of this stand in stark contrast to Russian conduct in Ukraine, & Israeli conduct in Gaza & the WB.
@Anonymous At Work: Many observers, Adam among them, have long noted that Bibi says one thing in English & another in Hebrew, yet somehow neither the Biden Administration nor the US MSM have caught on.
@YY_Sima Qian: the PRC is spending 1.7 – 1.9% of GDP on “national defense” (according to SIPRI & other organizations’ estimates, on a comparable accounting basis to “defense” spending of other powers, official budget of the PRC MoD is 1.2% of GDP), far lower than the US
On the other hand, they aren’t trying to maintain a major military presence across two (arguably three) oceans.
Right-wing talk show host and provocateur Alex Jones suggested he might leave the U.S. for Russia, and social media seemed very excited about the prospect. …
@gene108: Yes I know, it is a heavy lift. But I think some countries are going to think about building some equipment themselves – not everything, obviously, but some weapons they can use effectively without restrictions. Some sort of limited menu, as it were.
And I was saying from scratch. Not expecting any countries to sell their weapons secrets. Takes R&D and suitable industries. Countries will have to determine what their specialities could be. And/or they will negotiate terms of sale much more favourably.
@wjca: I think the bigger problem for the US is the high personnel costs (especially as a consequence of military adventures it has engaged in over the decades) & the broken procurement system that makes new weapons systems taking forever to develop & unaffordable.
The US defense spending also does not include much of the dedicated budgets for the wars & military operations that the US engages in across multiple continents.
All of the decades of wars, military actions, & maintaining forward postures have worn out the planes of the USAF & the ships of the USN, & by wearing out the troops via longer deployments have made recruitment more difficult for every service not named USMC. The decade plus of sequester significantly cut into maintenance budgets for both aircraft & ships, leaving the readiness rate for both USN & USAF low, the maintenance backlog long, & depleting out those that can be put into service that much more quickly. Meanwhile, US economic nationalism means leveraging SK’s & Japan’s large & capable shipbuilding capacity to recapitalize the USN/USCG fleets are unthinkable.
Basically, this vicious spiral is downstream of US grand strategy (or may the lack there of). The US is not willing to adequate fund the military that can support its grand geopolitical ambitions (there is little popular appetite to significantly increase defense spending at the expense of social welfare, & given the broken procurement system it is doubtful if any additional funding will be spent effectively), nor downsizing its geopolitical ambitions to a level that can be supported by its current & foreseeable military capabilities. The FP conventionalism from the Ds means they offer no solution, & the strident militarism of the reactionary Rs will make it that much worse that much more quickly. We will see if Harris/Walz can develop & execute a different vision, but Obama’s prior example shows how difficult it is to turn the DC conventional wisdom around.
@YY_Sima Qian: We will see if Harris/Walz can develop & execute a different vision, but Obama’s prior example shows how difficult it is to turn the DC conventional wisdom around.
I’d guess they can. Obama, after all, was constrained in a lot of ways which don’t apply to them.
Whether they will is, of course, a different question.
@wjca: I’d say they have greater space on domestic policy, where the political zeitgeist has shifted from Neoliberalism, although unfortunately toward economic nationalism & aspects of natsec Keynesianism. On foreign policy, the political zeitgeist has if anything become worse.
It will be very interesting to see who gets tapped for the nat sec slots in the new administration. The zeitgeist is one thing. But there are always minority views around. If someone with one of those views gets appointed, there could be big changes. See who happened when Trump stepped away from the Republican foreign policy establishment.
@wjca: Good point. But the Dems has taking on the mantle of FP orthodoxy to capture the part of the elite alienated from Trump’s & the R’s increasing radicalism & extremism on domestic policy. That mitigates against unconventional thinking on FP.
N M
Thanks Adam, as always!
Adam L Silverman
I’m gonna go work out. I’ll check back in before I get the grime off and rack out.
Adam L Silverman
@N M: You’re most welcome.
Bill K
If the U.S. is going to be bureaucratic assholes about this, then just ignore them. The British gave the weapons to the Ukrainians and if keeping the U.S. in the loop hinders the war effort then piss on ’em. Hit the targets you want and ignore American sputtering. I don’t think the U.S. will actually do anything punitive, and in the meantime you’ve destroyed some Russian bombers.
Carlo Graziani
If Luke Harding is correct that Ukraine has “captured” Apanasovka and Snagost (as opposed to merely fighting there) then there would seem to be a good chance that they will be in Koronevo in a few days, hopefully taking over the crossroads there. That would be pretty. At that point they’d completely control the local road net, and could deal with encircled troops at leisure, while beginning to entrench and waiting for the Russians to pop the stick from their ass and try to do something about it. Which now looks like September, at the earliest, and the longer they wait the harder its going to be for them to accomplish anything without decanting their Donetsk force into Kursk wholesale.
Syrsky has his limitations, but this is a well-conceived and well-executed operation.
MomSense
Keeping you and Rosie very close in my thoughts. Happy to chip in more if/when you need help.
I read your dispatches every night, but I am too emotional to comment. My DIL’s piano professor/mentor is from Ukraine. In her small apartment she and her husband have their autistic son and her sister and children living with them while her BIL is home and fighting in the army. My son and DIL do what she will accept to help. She is very proud.
Thank you for bearing witness day after painful day.
Carlo Graziani
@Bill K: The British don’t need “permission” to give the go-ahead on Storm Shadow use. They either want an excuse not to do so while appearing to be in favor, or they want political cover for doing so. If they really thought the Pentagon and the NSC would turn this kind of decision around by return of mail, they’d be idiots. They are not idiots. They just don’t want to be blamed for any consequences that may arise.
Jay
@Bill K:
The issue with the SCALP’s, StormShadows and Taurus missiles, is that Ukraine can’t program in target destinations. There is a small French Airforce team in Ukraine that does the target programming.
YY_Sima Qian
@Adam L Silverman: This report from Batak Ravid supports your (& what should be, by now, common sense) read:
& this follow up Tweet from Ravid:
At this point, I think the blame lies less w/ Blinken than w/ Biden, who is driving the US policies toward Israel & the ME in general, & that set of policies have been detached from reality since the early days of the Administration.
Jay
@Carlo Graziani:
There are US Export controlled components and software in the SCALP’s, StormShadow and Taurus missiles, that are also part of the replacement and upgrade programs for those missiles.
The US can bring consequences if they want.
Will they?
Hard to say, France, Italy, Lesser Brexitania. and Germany are no Israel.
Jay
As always, thank you, Adam.
Jay
https://nitter.poast.org/MykolaKuleba/status/1825523499374440512#m
Jay
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1825452740501282870.html
Gin & Tonic
Just a shout-out to Solomiia Bobrovska, the MP quoted in the Times piece. She is one of those who represents the best of modern Ukraine – well-educated, well-traveled in the West, comfortable in English, thoughtful and precise, scrupulously honest – and only 34. There are more like her in the Verkhovna Rada, just not a critical mass yet, unfortunately. My dear wife and I know several of them personally, including Solomiia.
Intrestingly, some of these MP’s were brought into politics by Sviatoslav Vakarchuk, leader of the popular musical group Okean Elzy.
Adam L Silverman
@Carlo Graziani: We told the Ukrainians you’re a stickler for road junctions, cross roads, and rail heads. They’ve dedicated this cross border offensive just for you.
More seriously, as for Syrskyi, sometimes being very detail oriented is a good thing.
Adam L Silverman
@MomSense: Thank you for the kind words and the good thoughts. You are most welcome.
Adam L Silverman
@Carlo Graziani: From the reporting, apparently there is US tech in them. Same with France and the unnamed 3rd NATO country.
I know a bit about Security Cooperation and the end use transfer agreement on this stuff must be bonkers.
Adam L Silverman
@YY_Sima Qian: I read the Israeli news every day. I follow the X accounts of Noga Tarnopolsky, Ravid, Roi Kais, and half a dozen others on a regular basis. Go read Eran Etzion’s feed. You’ll need to machine translate it. The Israelis, even the ones that are right of center, are astounded at Biden and his people’s naivete. And because the US media doesn’t cover anything that’s actually going on, no one in the US knows that 10s of thousands of Israelis are in the streets every weeknight and hundreds of thousands are in the streets every weekend demonstrating against Bibi, Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and demanding a ceasefire. Or that Bibi and his extremist coalition is still pushing the coup to remake Israel into a national-religious kleptocracy.
Adam L Silverman
@Jay: You’re welcome.
Sally
@Adam L Silverman: Thank you for all your work, Dr. Silverman.
I (who have no military knowledge whatsoever) see this as a lesson for other countries to learn. Have your own defence industries. So that no one can dictate what you can, and more importantly, cannot do with your weapons that you bought to defend yourself. If countries won’t sell weapons with no strings attached (I do understand why this is so, even if I don’t entirely agree), then you need to build the weapons yourself. Many countries could find themselves in conflicts in the same position as UA. Especially if protection agreements (Budapest) or treaties mean nothing.
Anonymous At Work
@YY_Sima Qian: I’d been looking but no reports about whether Bibi announced he agreed with Blinken’s proposal…in English or in Hebrew. I’m guessing from the report that Bibi was using English.
Anonymous At Work
@Adam L Silverman: I was reading a Business Insider article that UA has now taken out the primary bridges in the Kursk region preventing resupply and reinforcements to remaining orcs. Seems like a twist on the Kherson Offensive. Rather than fake an attack, blow the bridges behind the Russians and then sweep up the encircled Russians, the UA may have actually attacked the Russians to get within range of taking out key bridges, and are now attacking encircled Russians.
See if I can find you the link.
YY_Sima Qian
OT: Yesterday, Subsole asked about the PRC’s approach to arms exports, & implications on their potential effectiveness in actual warfare (especially a high intensity scenario over Taiwan). What follows will be characteristically verbose, so please bear w/ me :-) (I don’t need to remind everyone that I am just a rank amateur w/ some interest on the subject):
I think it is beneficial to emphasize that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) origin, ethos & institutional culture remain largely that of a revolution force w/ insurgent roots, that for most of its history it had confronted, & fought from, positions of immense disadvantage in both manpower (qty) & materiel (qty & quality) against its long series of opponents (the warlord armies, the KMT regime’s National Revolutionary Army, the Imperial Japanese Army & its various Chinese puppet forces, the UN forces in Korea, the Soviet Army, the Republic of China Navy & Air Force, the USN/USAF, etc.). The only opponent where the PLA had parity w/ was the Indian Army in ’62. The only opponent the PLA was advantaged in manpower & materiel was the Vietnamese Army in ’79 (& the series of intense border clashes through the ensuing decade). This experience meant that the PLA has historically emphasized force (at least regular force) preservation in its operational doctrine & combat tactics (though not shying from casualties to achieve objectives), & emphasized build quality in its arms production/procurement (though quality in design & level of technological sophistication had historically been huge limiting factors).
Serious Western scholars of the PLA (who are few & far in between) have long noted how much of a learning organization it has demonstrated to being over the course of its history, because it had to, much more so than the Soviet military & more so than the US military (which takes qualitative advantage for granted, & since the end of the Cold War quantitative advantage, too). Historically, the PLA had allowed significant latitude for lower echelon officers & even foot soldiers to take their own initiative w/in its meticulous planning, despite not having a professional NCO corps (because until post-’62 the PLA had always been such a battle hardened force up & down its ranks, & had not yet been damaged by the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution). Until the ’00s, it was not unusual for PRC weapons to be poorly designed, but if they were ever poorly manufactured (especially for PLA’s use) it was due to limitations in the production/fabrication process & not a lackadaisical attitude. In many ways, this is the direct opposite of the Soviet experience.
Due to both falling out w/ the USSR in the late ’50s, & the decade of technological stagnation during the GPCR, the arms that the PRC provided to its allies (such North Vietnam, Albania, & communist liberation movements across the Third World) during the mid- to late Cold War were functional w/ decent build quality, but decidedly unsophisticated, & technologically increasingly obsolescent/obsolete as the time went on. The armor, aircraft & artillery pieces that the PRC sold to both Iraq & Iran in the 80s were obviously obsolescent even then (compared to Western & Soviet gear of the time), but were nevertheless more advanced than the gear the PLA had to make do w/ until military modernization gathered pace in the late ’00s. Nevertheless, the PLA’s gear were generally well made & well maintained, even during the ’80s & ’90s when it was starved of funding as the CPC regime overwhelmingly prioritized economic and scientific/technological development.
Since the early ’10s, the pace of the PRC’s military & MIC modernization has accelerated at an extraordinary pace, built on the foundation of the PRC’s extraordinarily growing economy & immense (still extraordinarily growing) industrial base. The warships & submarines (some used & refurbished) the PRC sold to Pakistan, Bangladesh & Thailand in the ’90s & ’00s remain very functional (assuming good maintenance), an indirect sign of their build quality. More modern warships, submarines, warplanes, drones, artillery pieces & armor had been sold to countries in South Asia, SE Asia, MENA, & West Africa in the ’10s, the customers often come back for more, & the gears have been used extensively in civil wars & counterinsurgency campaigns (along side Russian & Western made weapons), to good effect. Both Saudi Arabia & the UAE had bought large numbers of artillery pieces & armed drones from the PRC, which were used widely in Yemen & Libya. The KSA bought the DF-3 IRBMs from the PRC in the ’80s (when the KSA still recognized the ROC & not the PRC) for a long range strike capability to potentially threaten both Israel & Iran, that have now been replaced by DF-21 IRBMs. Pakistan used to insist on integrating Western electronics, radars and fire control systems (FCSs) into the PRC designed tanks, fighters & warships that it bough or produced under license. Over the past decade, it has been adopting Chinese electronics, radars & FCSs on the newer Chinese designed platforms it has been acquiring. Since the early ’00s it had been noted that PRC license produced versions of the Su-27 fighters had noticeably better build quality than Russian made ones, due to the former’s investment in acquiring Western software & hardware, as well as adopting Western manufacturing processes. All of these indirectly suggest that Chinese arms are competitive on the global market against Russian, South Korean & Western vendors, since most of these customers have many other options they can choose from. As the PLA rapidly modernized, the export models became slightly downgraded in performance, or were models that had lost out in the domestic competition for PLA tenders. These days, the PRC does not offer its most advanced platforms (stealth aircraft, stealthy destroyers/cruisers, latest gen nuclear attack submarines, latest gen MRBMs/IRBMs) for export, for the same reasons the US does not offer them for most of its allies & partners.
One additional complication is the emergence of private or quasi-state owned enterprises expanding from civilian markets into arms, w/o the commitment to build quality that characterized the traditional PRC MIC. Since they typically do not supply the PLA, they do not have to meet the PLA’s relatively demanding standards. For export customers who just want things cheap, they can deliver cheaply made products that reflect their prices, just like what we have seen w/ PRC made civilian goods. You can basically purchase products of every quality level from PRC suppliers, at the commensurate (though still competitive or advantaged) price level.
In the ’90s & ’00s, the USN/USAF used to be able to dominate the PLAN/PLAAF in situational awareness, electronic warfare (EW), & offensive prowess right to the PRC’s door step, & were not shy in demonstrating that position of dominance from time to time to “signal deterrence”. Even the RoCN/RoCAF had a noticeable qualitative edge over the PLAN/PLAAF, & the JA”SD”F/JM”SD”F enjoyed decisive qualitative advantage. Over the past decade, the balance of power across the Taiwan Strait & w/in the 1st Island Chain has shifted dramatically. The RoCN/RoCAF are now hopelessly outgunned. Even the USN 7th Fleet is outgunned in the Western Pacific. The JA”SD”F is now at a disadvantage in qty & [on paper] quality, & [on paper] the JM”SD”F has lost the qualitative edge. The EW cat & mouse game w/in the 1st Island Chain is now much more even, & the seas w/in the 1st Island Chain are no longer permissive operating environments for the USN’s SSNs or the JM”SD”F’s SSKs. Outside of the 1st Island Chain & especially outside the range of PLA AShBMs, however, the USN/USAF & JM”SD”F still enjoy overwhelming advantage.
Of course, how the PLA will perform in high intensity warfare will be determined less by the quality of its gear (which is undeniably improving rapidly), & more by the quality of the training & the effectiveness of combat tactics & operational doctrine, & whether they can fully exploit the rapidly improve qty & quality of gear. Since the PLA has not fought a high intensity war since ’79, & has not seen combat operations of any kind since ’88, this is unknowable. Long time observers of the PLA have noted how closely the PLA follow the military developments elsewhere & seek lessons from the wars fought by others & reforms implemented by others. The PLA has seen a series of massive cuts from the early ’80s to ’15, & a series of structural & doctrinal reforms, clearly reflecting the lessons it is taking from the experience observed elsewhere. Exercises have become increasing complex, realistic & large across & integrating all services. The PLANAF/PLAAF pilots now have more flying hours per year than their USN/USAF counterparts. PLA units have noticeably outperformed their Russian counterparts in joint exercises, mainly due to superior organization, tactics & doctrine, rather than superior equipment. The US DoD used to speculate that poor training was a factor in some of the reckless maneuvers that PLAAF/PLAN/PLANAF fighters & warships engaged in during intercepts, in additional to aggressive posturing. Now, they note that PLAAF/PLAN/PLANAF fighters & warships are perfectly capable of “professional” (as the US DoD deems it) intercepts & playing the usual cat & mouse game, & any dangerous maneuvers are calculated to send a message. All of these are indirect hints, & do not answer the question of how the PLA will perform in high intensity warfare, how well the equipment will perform, how effective will the tactics & doctrines be, how well the personnel up & down the ranks will react to the inevitably intense pressure & enormous casualties, & how quickly will the PLA be able to adjust. Until the PLA actually fights a high intensity war, that is unknowable.
Finally, the rapid military modernization of the PLA is happening when the PRC is spending 1.7 – 1.9% of GDP on “national defense” (according to SIPRI & other organizations’ estimates, on a comparable accounting basis to “defense” spending of other powers, official budget of the PRC MoD is 1.2% of GDP), far lower than the US & lower than what the US is pushing its allies to spend. This is not a PRC economy preparing for war. As previously stated, the PLA has not fought since the late ’80s, & the most aggressive actions the PRC has taken are Stone/Iron Age brawls in the Himalayas that its border defense troops occasionally engage in w/ the Indian Army, & the bumper boats & water cannon volleys that the Chinese Coast Guard targets the Filipino Coast Guard w/ in the South China Sea. Aggressive & unjustifiable actions, at least towards the Philippines, but nonetheless a far cry from the military actions every other major power has engaged in over the past 3 decades, certainly relatively to Putinist Russia (or what the US has enabled; then again, in some of these humanitarian disasters the PRC played its part in enabling, too). Something to keep in mind when politicians & think tankers fall prey to moral panic on topic of the Chinese threat.
gene108
@Sally:
Countries with advanced weapons capabilities aren’t going to sell the details on how to build the weapons yourself.
It takes a lot of time and resources to build a domestic defense industry.
You need universities capable of training scientists and engineers with the ability to understand the best technical options. You need the precision equipment necessary to make the weapons. You need the natural resources to manufacture weapons on a significant scale. You need the patience for prototypes to go wrong, and corrections made. Also, the surplus money to put into domestic defense production rather than just buying from established makers.
Very few countries possess this on any significant scale. They may have a few domestic weapons systems, fighter planes, etc., but they probably aren’t as sophisticated as Western designs, and not made in any significant numbers.
way2blue
Adam, I can’t thank you enough for your nightly recaps. Albeit, they’re beyond difficult to read, so I grasp at straws—if Jake Sullivan is the keystone—who above him can overrule him? Who on the inside can derail his appalling approach to global security.
Russia’s red line after red line are crossed and the sky doesn’t fall. Where is Biden’s green line? When does he step up? In a better world, the U.S. would tell Ukraine—once we deliver these weapons—they belong to you to use as you see fit. Only with the caveat that humanitarian & international norms be respected. Sigh.
YY_Sima Qian
@way2blue: Ukraine has amply demonstrated that its forces are willing & able to act according to Laws on Armed Conflict & International Humanitarian Laws, even w/ its escalating drone warfare against military & militarily relevant targets w/in Russia, as well as the physical incursion by its ground forces into Russia.
The impulse to exact revenge is an immensely powerful one, & Ukraine is admirably suppressing this impulse.
All of this stand in stark contrast to Russian conduct in Ukraine, & Israeli conduct in Gaza & the WB.
YY_Sima Qian
@Anonymous At Work: Many observers, Adam among them, have long noted that Bibi says one thing in English & another in Hebrew, yet somehow neither the Biden Administration nor the US MSM have caught on.
wjca
On the other hand, they aren’t trying to maintain a major military presence across two (arguably three) oceans.
Mallard Filmore
Only slightly related:
Alex Jones Considers Leaving U.S.
Sally
@gene108: Yes I know, it is a heavy lift. But I think some countries are going to think about building some equipment themselves – not everything, obviously, but some weapons they can use effectively without restrictions. Some sort of limited menu, as it were.
And I was saying from scratch. Not expecting any countries to sell their weapons secrets. Takes R&D and suitable industries. Countries will have to determine what their specialities could be. And/or they will negotiate terms of sale much more favourably.
YY_Sima Qian
@wjca: I think the bigger problem for the US is the high personnel costs (especially as a consequence of military adventures it has engaged in over the decades) & the broken procurement system that makes new weapons systems taking forever to develop & unaffordable.
The US defense spending also does not include much of the dedicated budgets for the wars & military operations that the US engages in across multiple continents.
All of the decades of wars, military actions, & maintaining forward postures have worn out the planes of the USAF & the ships of the USN, & by wearing out the troops via longer deployments have made recruitment more difficult for every service not named USMC. The decade plus of sequester significantly cut into maintenance budgets for both aircraft & ships, leaving the readiness rate for both USN & USAF low, the maintenance backlog long, & depleting out those that can be put into service that much more quickly. Meanwhile, US economic nationalism means leveraging SK’s & Japan’s large & capable shipbuilding capacity to recapitalize the USN/USCG fleets are unthinkable.
Basically, this vicious spiral is downstream of US grand strategy (or may the lack there of). The US is not willing to adequate fund the military that can support its grand geopolitical ambitions (there is little popular appetite to significantly increase defense spending at the expense of social welfare, & given the broken procurement system it is doubtful if any additional funding will be spent effectively), nor downsizing its geopolitical ambitions to a level that can be supported by its current & foreseeable military capabilities. The FP conventionalism from the Ds means they offer no solution, & the strident militarism of the reactionary Rs will make it that much worse that much more quickly. We will see if Harris/Walz can develop & execute a different vision, but Obama’s prior example shows how difficult it is to turn the DC conventional wisdom around.
Sally
@way2blue: My understanding, Biden can overrule Sullivan.
YY_Sima Qian
@Mallard Filmore: How can we expedite Alex Jones’ departure? Can’t come soon enough.
wjca
Well he would appear to qualify on sharing ‘traditional Russian spiritual and moral values.’ Or at least current ones.
Don’t let the door hit you on the butt on the way out.
wjca
I’d guess they can. Obama, after all, was constrained in a lot of ways which don’t apply to them.
Whether they will is, of course, a different question.
YY_Sima Qian
@wjca: I’d say they have greater space on domestic policy, where the political zeitgeist has shifted from Neoliberalism, although unfortunately toward economic nationalism & aspects of natsec Keynesianism. On foreign policy, the political zeitgeist has if anything become worse.
wjca
@YY_Sima Qian:
It will be very interesting to see who gets tapped for the nat sec slots in the new administration. The zeitgeist is one thing. But there are always minority views around. If someone with one of those views gets appointed, there could be big changes. See who happened when Trump stepped away from the Republican foreign policy establishment.
YY_Sima Qian
@wjca: Good point. But the Dems has taking on the mantle of FP orthodoxy to capture the part of the elite alienated from Trump’s & the R’s increasing radicalism & extremism on domestic policy. That mitigates against unconventional thinking on FP.
AlaskaReader
Thanks Adam
patrick II
@Jay:
That sounds nearly as bad as Arkansas.
patrick II
@Jay:
That was hard to read. Russia is a very sick country.