Russia invades Ukraine

[AlterEgo]

If he is removed in a coup expect it'll be very similar to the way Romania dealt with Ceausescu.

That is not going to happen.

 

[najaB]

That is not going to happen.

As I'm sure Nicolae himself was saying on the 21st of December.

 

[brad465]

While there is no confirmation of this, another way Putin could go is the way most of the human population goes, death through natural causes. There have been plenty of rumors about him being in poor health, including having Parkinson's or something that is making him very paranoid with that long table and general isolation. But even if he does have some form of terminal illness, he could still survive for a long time and do plenty of damage, on top of what he's already done.

 

[AlterEgo]

As I'm sure Nicolae himself was saying on the 21st of December.

Potential of a palace coup and Putin getting the Romanov treatment is so low I don't think it is even a possibility worth discussing.

The most likely outcome is a loss of faith in his inner circle and the emergence of an alternative strongman in Russia, with Putin put out to pasture with a hollow political legacy.

 

[najaB]

Potential of a palace coup and Putin getting the Romanov treatment is so low I don't think it is even a possibility worth discussing.

The most likely outcome is a loss of faith in his inner circle and the emergence of an alternative strongman in Russia, with Putin put out to pasture with a hollow political legacy.

Today, yes. But how many will be willing to give him a quiet retirement if there is a loss in Ukraine and the sanctions continue to bite? I can definitely see him falling down the stairs a few times.

 

[dakta]

Biden promised a few weeks ago that NATO would respond if chemical weapons were used in Ukraine. Now that it seems this has happened, I wonder what NATO’s response will be.

a truly damning weather report?

Putin’s troops will be ‘easy pickings’ bogged down by Ukraine mud, says defence minister

Putin is believed to be pouring tens of thousands of soldiers into the Donbas after the failure of his lightning invasion plan to seize Kyiv within days

uk.yahoo.com

Now I post this somewhat tongue in cheek, but it's the same tongue in cheek as the whole 'we will hold putin to account' concept where obviously telling someone like putin that he is a very bad bad man is holding him to account, which is about as far as I can see that going. Technically it might be doable because to hold someone account means force them to explain their actions in which case 'just because' will likely do do. Though they could just regurgitate the we are saving Ukraine from itself stuff either if they want to put more effort in.

 

[najaB]

a truly damning weather report?

It won't be the first army to be defeated by the weather in that part of the world. Or the second. Or the third.

 

[SJL2020]

a truly damning weather report?

Putin’s troops will be ‘easy pickings’ bogged down by Ukraine mud, says defence minister

Putin is believed to be pouring tens of thousands of soldiers into the Donbas after the failure of his lightning invasion plan to seize Kyiv within days

uk.yahoo.com

The Minister has a point about mud but is incorrect about Barbarossa, which didn't commence until 22/6/41 (so wasn't in Spring).

 

[gg1]

Today, yes. But how many will be willing to give him a quiet retirement if there is a loss in Ukraine and the sanctions continue to bite? I can definitely see him falling down the stairs a few times.

Absolutely.

As a deterrent to any future Russian leader considering a repeat performance a few years or decades down the line, it's imperative strict sanctions remain on Russia until Putin faces justice, he has gone too far to be let off the hook by merely withdrawing his forces. Ideally this should be in the form of a war crimes trial under the remit of the ICC but summary justice within Russia would have the same effect in terms of a deterrent.

 

[dakta]

It won't be the first army to be defeated by the weather in that part of the world.

Let's hope it holds because NATO alternatives may be tangible

 

[najaB]

Let's hope it holds because NATO alternatives may be tangible

I meant the Russian army would be defeated!

 

[dakta]

a truly damning weather report?

The Minister has a point about mud but is incorrect about Barbarossa, which didn't commence until 22/6/41 (so wasn't in Spring).

It wasn't a serious post, I just felt it was so typical NATO if it was their response - I just happened to read the quote i quoted at the time i had that article open

Some may have to disagree to agree on that

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I can see a scenario where post war sanctions on Russia will not be fully lifted until Putin has been removed from power and handed over to the International Criminal Court, making it in their own interests (which realistically is the only reason they support him currently) for the oligarchs to back a coup.

I would actually go further, and hope that sanctions will remain and continue to be tightened until Russia not only gets out of Ukraine, but also co-operates with whatever international war crimes tribunal is set up, allowing that tribunal access inside Russia to track down all those suspected of war crimes - most particularly including not just Putin and those commanders who ordered the war crimes, but all those ordinary soldiers etc. who have raped, tortured, or murdered defenceless civilians. I would also like to see investigations opened up into similar atrocities that Russia may have committed in Chechnya and Syria, and the question of Russia's occupation of parts of Georgia raised too.

On a separate issue, I think any easing of sanctions should further be conditional on Russia allowing in and co-operating with international investigators to track down all children and adults who have been kidnapped and re-settled in Russia, so that they can be returned home if they wish.

Of course there's no way that Russia will agree to this in the short term, but hopefully after a few years of sanctions biting and perhaps once Putin has gone (which will happen sooner or later just on account of his age)... We really need to show the international community that, any other countries thinking of trying what Russia has done, this is what will happen (and I know we've been very lazy about that up to now).

 

[najaB]

I would actually go further, and hope that sanctions will remain and continue to be tightened until Russia not only gets out of Ukraine, but also co-operates with whatever international war crimes tribunal is set up, allowing that tribunal access inside Russia to track down all those suspected of war crimes - most particularly including not just Putin and those commanders who ordered the war crimes, but all those ordinary soldiers etc. who have raped, tortured, or murdered defenceless civilians. I would also like to see investigations opened up into similar atrocities that Russia may have committed in Chechnya and Syria, and the question of Russia's occupation of parts of Georgia raised too.

However, experience shows that strict, open-ended sanctions have had limited effect in affecting regime change. Take Cuba and Iran as examples.

I do agree that it can't simply be a return to "business as normal" as soon as Russian troops leave Ukraine though. I think it would make sense to ease up on the sanctions that punish the common Russian citizen, and retain and tighten those that target the leadership. And also try our best to slow/prevent them re-arming.

 

[Shrop]

My post wasn't about what SHOULD happen but what I think WILL happen.

I agree, it's more likely that this will happen. But I maintain that a far better punishment would be for Putin and others to be forced into a realistic and direct encounter with the horrors that they've perpetrated.

 

[JonasB]

In other news all irony meters around the world have broken beyond repair:

Ukraine War: Russia warns Sweden and Finland against Nato membership

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the move won't bring stability to Europe.

www.bbc.co.uk

It really has. There were som discussion on social media about that piece of news yesterday in Sweden, and many seem to feel that if that is Putin's opinion, we really need to join Nato.

And there are rumours that Finland are very close to applying for membership, which means that Sweden will probably apply as well.

 

[najaB]

And there are rumours that Finland are very close to applying for membership, which means that Sweden will probably apply as well.

There was majority support for joining right after the invasion. I can only assume that Russia's actions since since will only have increased that support.

 

[DustyBin]

However, experience shows that strict, open-ended sanctions have had limited effect in affecting regime change. Take Cuba and Iran as examples.

I do agree that it can't simply be a return to "business as normal" as soon as Russian troops leave Ukraine though. I think it would make sense to ease up on the sanctions that punish the common Russian citizen, and retain and tighten those that target the leadership. And also try our best to slow/prevent them re-arming.

I agree. It's not going to be "business as usual" for the foreseeable future, however we must not create a situation where the average Russian citizen blames the West for their plight (another lesson from history).

 

[Cdd89]

I agree we shouldn't go back to 'business as usual', but my view is that sanctions should be tiered. If we keep them going at their current level because Russia hasn't been apologetic enough, they have no incentive not to resume hostilities. The ultimate purpose of sanctions is a deterrent, and they don't deter anyone from anything whilst applied.

Therefore, I think there should be an immediate and significant drop as soon as there is a cessation of hostilities from Russia, and a further drop for every subsequent year that remains the case (or if the situation changes).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I agree we shouldn't go back to 'business as usual', but my view is that sanctions should be tiered. If we keep them going at their current level because Russia hasn't been apologetic enough, they have no incentive not to resume hostilities. The ultimate purpose of sanctions is a deterrent, and they don't deter anyone from anything whilst applied.

Well if sanctions work effectively, the 'incentive' not to resume hostilities will be that the sanctions will have made it impossible for Russia to develop or acquire any new military technology remotely capable of matching NATO, and that they therefore know that any resumption of hostilities would result in their forces getting trounced 10x as badly as happened in Ukraine.

Therefore, I think there should be an immediate and significant drop as soon as there is a cessation of hostilities from Russia, and a further drop for every subsequent year that remains the case (or if the situation changes).

The problem there is the significant chance that Putin's regime would use any drop in sanctions to start re-acquiring the means to resume hostilities.

 

[brad465]

French Presidential candidate Marine Le Pen has publicly confirmed she opposes sanctions on Russian oil and gas:

Marine Le Pen says she opposes sanctions on Russian gas

The French presidential candidate says she is in favour of sanctions on Russia - except for energy.

www.bbc.co.uk

French presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen said she broadly supports sanctions against Russia, except when it comes to oil and gas supplies.
The far-right politician will battle Emmanuel Macron for the presidency in a run-off election after obtaining her highest result ever in the first round.
But she has faced criticism for allegedly being too close to Russia amid the war in Ukraine.
"I am perfectly in favour of all the other sanctions," Ms Le Pen said.
In the interview with France Inter Radio, she said: "I do not want French people to suffer the consequences of sanctions" on oil and gas.
France, like many other European countries, imports much of its natural gas through pipelines from Russia, using it for residential and commercial energy.
But Ms Le Pen has been criticised by rivals over her past support for Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin.
She previously appeared to support Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula, and in 2017 called for international sanctions over the issue to be dropped.
In 2014, when Crimea was annexed by Russia, her political party received a loan from a Russian bank with alleged ties to the Kremlin.
Ms Le Pen justified her previous remarks by saying the annexation of Crimea was a different situation to the current invasion of Ukraine, and painted her support for Mr Putin as reflective of her wider ambition for a "multi-polar" world, Reuters reports.
Despite softening her stance on leaving the European Union and other nationalist issues in recent years, she is still widely opposed by most of France's political establishment.
Former president Nicolas Sarkozy, for example, publicly announced on Tuesday that he would vote for his party's rival Emmanuel Macron, and encouraged others to do the same.

We rightly gave Germany a lot of stick for their acts of cosying up to Russian commodities, and while they are causing some issues not supporting an embargo right now, the current administration is at least working to remove this dependency in the medium and long term. But if Le Pen gets in I think she'll become more of an inhibitor on action against Russia than Germany.

 

[yorksrob]

Unfortunately "dropping of sanctions" means the West becoming economically embroiled with the country, and that's not something I believe the West should subject itself to again lightly, given the nature of the Russian regime.

Until Russia demonstrates that it can be a normal country that's prepared to live within its already generous borders, the policy should be maximum economic disengagement and military re-armament.

 

[Cloud Strife]

It really has. There were som discussion on social media about that piece of news yesterday in Sweden, and many seem to feel that if that is Putin's opinion, we really need to join Nato.

And there are rumours that Finland are very close to applying for membership, which means that Sweden will probably apply as well.

Finland is a lock-in for membership within a few months. They already cooperate very closely with NATO, and they're more integrated than Sweden is. They also have more urgency than Sweden to get into NATO ASAP. Sweden, I'd expect them to take a little while longer, but I could still see them joining NATO by the end of the year.

Either way, it's a disaster for Russia. It means that the Baltic Sea will be de facto controlled by NATO, and worse still, there's a high chance that Gotland will become a full NATO base in future in order to protect the Baltic and the Baltic States. Sweden and Finland also aren't shy about military expenses, so it represents a significant increase in NATO's military capabilities.

One other thing that's caught my eye: more and more people are outright saying that the Bundeswehr isn't supplying weapons to Ukraine because it simply doesn't have any. The German Defence Minister said that weapons will have to come from the arms industry, which raises a very important question: what the hell has Germany been doing with their military?

 

[DustyBin]

One other thing that's caught my eye: more and more people are outright saying that the Bundeswehr isn't supplying weapons to Ukraine because it simply doesn't have any. The German Defence Minister said that weapons will have to come from the arms industry, which raises a very important question: what the hell has Germany been doing with their military?

Not a lot seemingly! It's one of those things that Trump was essentially correct about. As divisive as he was/is his underlying message wasn't always wrong, even if the way he delivered it was....

I think the Germans are playing a bit of a game here to be honest whereby they're seen to be doing something without actually doing it. I believe Ukraine asked for some light tanks currently in storage (model escapes me) but have instead been offered Leopard 1s which need recommissioning and then training provided to Ukrainian crews. The whole process will take months by which time they may not be required....

 

[kristiang85]

Biden promised a few weeks ago that NATO would respond if chemical weapons were used in Ukraine. Now that it seems this has happened, I wonder what NATO’s response will be.

Probably the same way Obama responded when Russia used them in Syria after saying that was his red line. Precisely nothing.

 

[DustyBin]

I've not seen anything definitive but there appears to be some doubt over whether this was a chemical attack, and if it was it looks to have been a small quantity of a relatively mild substance. I've also seen a report that it was carried out by separatist forces as opposed to the Russians although whether that matters I'm not sure....

 

[JonasB]

There was majority support for joining right after the invasion. I can only assume that Russia's actions since since will only have increased that support.

In Sweden the support has not changed that much in the last month. There was a recent poll in which 45% answered yes and 33% no to whether Sweden should join Nato. On the other hand, in late march another poll asked the same question, assuming Finland decided to join Nato. In which case 63% of Swedes would support a membership.

In Finland on the other hand there is a bigger support with over 60% being pro-Nato.

Finland is a lock-in for membership within a few months. They already cooperate very closely with NATO, and they're more integrated than Sweden is. They also have more urgency than Sweden to get into NATO ASAP. Sweden, I'd expect them to take a little while longer, but I could still see them joining NATO by the end of the year.

There has been many meetings between the Swedish a Finnish governments during since the war started so I wouldn't be surprised if we apply for membership together. The big question is how the Swedish Social democrats will act, they need to become pro-Nato for Sweden to join. And with an election in September they have a deadline.

 

[daodao]

Finland is a lock-in for membership within a few months.

If the Finns attempted to join NATO now, there is a major risk of a pre-emptive Russian strike which could lead to Helsinki resembling Mariupol today. That would be an avoidable tragedy. Finland has had a modus vivendi with the USSR/Russia since the end of WW2 and it would be foolish to destabilise this arrangement. Unlike Ukraine, Finland is essentially physically separated from the rest of Europe by the Gulf of Bothnia, but has a very long land border with Russia, so is vulnerable to a well-organised Russian attack, as in 1944; once the Finns' military supplies are exhausted, it would be difficult to replenish them from abroad.

 

[najaB]

If the Finns attempted to join NATO now, there is a major risk of a pre-emptive Russian strike which could lead to Helsinki resembling Mariupol today.

With what army?

 

[ainsworth74]

If the Finns attempted to join NATO now, there is a major risk of a pre-emptive Russian strike which could lead to Helsinki resembling Mariupol today. That would be an avoidable tragedy. Finland has had a modus vivendi with the USSR/Russia since the end of WW2 and it would be foolish to destabilise this arrangement. Unlike Ukraine, Finland is essentially physically separated from the rest of Europe by the Gulf of Bothnia, but has a very long land border with Russia, so is vulnerable to a well-organised Russian attack, as in 1944; once the Finns' military supplies are exhausted, it would be difficult to replenish them from abroad.

I don't exactly admire your optimistic assessment of the likely performance of the Russian armed forces in this putative unprovoked invasion of Finland but personally considering their performance in Ukraine so far I'd not rule out the Fins conquering St Petersburg.