Miragedriver
Brigadier
The consequences of attacks Stakhanov
Back to bottling my Grenache
Back to bottling my Grenache
Ukraine Revolt/Civil War News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter Jura The idiot
- Start date
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Donetsk today. The consequences of striking Ukrainian artillery.
Back to bottling my Grenache
Back to bottling my Grenache
Miragedriver
Brigadier
Members of the armed forces of the separatist self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic drive a tank on the outskirts of Donetsk
Picture: REUTERS
Back to bottling my Grenache
Ukraine casualty figures arising from the battle for the airport and Peski, as supplied by the militia.
DONETSK, January 22. /TASS/. As many as 597 Ukrainian servicemen were killed in clashes with Donetsk militias at the Donetsk airport, Eduard Basurin, a spokesman for the defense ministry of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) said on Thursday.
“A total of 597 army servicemen and troops of the National Guard were killed,” he told a briefing. “I am speaking only about those whose bodies have been retrieved from the vicinity of the airport and in the settlement of Peski. As many as 44 people have yielded themselves prisoner.”
He said that the DPR army had destroyed 49 Ukrainian tanks and 47 infantry combat vehicles and armored vehicles in retaliatory fire.
More than 1,500 Ukrainian troops were wounded and taken to field hospitals.
DONETSK, January 22. /TASS/. As many as 597 Ukrainian servicemen were killed in clashes with Donetsk militias at the Donetsk airport, Eduard Basurin, a spokesman for the defense ministry of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) said on Thursday.
“A total of 597 army servicemen and troops of the National Guard were killed,” he told a briefing. “I am speaking only about those whose bodies have been retrieved from the vicinity of the airport and in the settlement of Peski. As many as 44 people have yielded themselves prisoner.”
He said that the DPR army had destroyed 49 Ukrainian tanks and 47 infantry combat vehicles and armored vehicles in retaliatory fire.
More than 1,500 Ukrainian troops were wounded and taken to field hospitals.
bad news for ukraine are coming in like snowflakes this morning (well, morning where i live) on twitter, and they are often corroborated by pro-ukraine reports. it seems almost like a concerted propaganda effort, an organized transition from chest-thumping at the onset of battle to cries of desperation when it has deteriorated beyond redemption, presumably as an appeal for outside help.
it also worries me to watch moscow's languishing control over NAF being dealt another blow after the latter had refused to adhere to a recent ceasefire agreement. NAF's loss of confidence in russia is somewhat commensurate to its success on the field. this presents a dilemma to putin, since he wants NAF to succeed in order to attain a stronger bargaining position, but also wants to keep a leash on it to ensure flexibility in his dealings with his counterparts in ukriane and europe.
it also worries me to watch moscow's languishing control over NAF being dealt another blow after the latter had refused to adhere to a recent ceasefire agreement. NAF's loss of confidence in russia is somewhat commensurate to its success on the field. this presents a dilemma to putin, since he wants NAF to succeed in order to attain a stronger bargaining position, but also wants to keep a leash on it to ensure flexibility in his dealings with his counterparts in ukriane and europe.
solarz
Brigadier
Putin supports the NAF by giving them supplies. No supplies = no NAF.
I think the real question is, what is the end game that Putin is aiming for? Is Putin looking to create a real Novorossiya as buffer? Or is he trying to topple the Kiev government so that the entire Ukraine can once again fall under Russian influence?
Either way, peace talks at this point would make no sense. If Putin is trying to create Novorossiya, then the NAF needs to at least push Kiev's forces out of Donetsk borders. If Putin seeks to topple the Kiev government, then he needs to apply a lot more pressure than there exists right now.
Putin is likely engaging in these talks only as a way to mollify EU, or more specifically, Germany.
well you never know, the relationship is reciprocal since russia also relies on NAF to do its dirty work in ukraine. the US supplies iraq and afghan forces with everything and still has trouble controlling them.
it is never a bad idea to have a clear picture of what your end game should look like and link that to your tactical actions. without making too many assumptions, i can't see the toppling of the current administration being excluded from Putin's desired end state. I would say then that the russian president had grossly underestimated poroshenko's resilience. but he is indeed pushing ukraine closer to crisis point, evident in rumours flaring about yatz and kolomoisky aligned against the president. it is a hard call though how many more of those ilovaisk-style humiliations it must take to precipitate a collapse of ukraine's current political order.
solarz
Brigadier
The more I think about it, the more I believe that there was an under-the-table deal between Russia and EU/USA. Back in September, there were talks about Russia cutting off gas to Ukraine. This never materialized. There was also talk of EU/US stepping up its military aid to the Kiev regime. Judging by the spectacular failure of the most recent government offensive, this has not materialized either.
Add to this the toning down of rhetoric among EU members, and I think it's fair to say that the diplomats have been busy behind the scenes.
Add to this the toning down of rhetoric among EU members, and I think it's fair to say that the diplomats have been busy behind the scenes.
It looks like classic plausible deniability to me.
Russia cannot be seen to openly promoting a military solution, but also realises it needs to make "Novorossiya" a more viable entity than the current rump it is.
On top of that of course, is the very obvious danger for Putin, that the more he negotiates on behalf off the Rebels and the more that these decisions are implemented by them, the more vulnerable he becomes to the accusation that he is in control of the whole situation and that the only reason it is still going on, is because he wills it. This is a great vulnerability if you believe that the whole target of the Ukraine operation is Putin and Russia and to find an excuse to maintain/increase sanctions and restart the cold war/reverse military spending cuts etc.
If that is the case, then the talks are in fact a trap and only by "not being in control" of the rebels, can he avoid it.
The counter vulnerability is; on the face of it, that Putin is actually weak, not in control of the situation, of limited influence and ineffective interlocutor.
I say however that this temptation to attack Putin and claim loss of face is actually a Russian counter trap and that the moment you make that argument, you neutralise any rationale for the sanctions regime.
I also note that Russia is saying that the Ukraine problem cannot be solved through military action. This is true, but it ignores that the negotiating position of the rebels can be significantly improved through a few more months successfully prosecuting it!
Russia cannot be seen to openly promoting a military solution, but also realises it needs to make "Novorossiya" a more viable entity than the current rump it is.
On top of that of course, is the very obvious danger for Putin, that the more he negotiates on behalf off the Rebels and the more that these decisions are implemented by them, the more vulnerable he becomes to the accusation that he is in control of the whole situation and that the only reason it is still going on, is because he wills it. This is a great vulnerability if you believe that the whole target of the Ukraine operation is Putin and Russia and to find an excuse to maintain/increase sanctions and restart the cold war/reverse military spending cuts etc.
If that is the case, then the talks are in fact a trap and only by "not being in control" of the rebels, can he avoid it.
The counter vulnerability is; on the face of it, that Putin is actually weak, not in control of the situation, of limited influence and ineffective interlocutor.
I say however that this temptation to attack Putin and claim loss of face is actually a Russian counter trap and that the moment you make that argument, you neutralise any rationale for the sanctions regime.
I also note that Russia is saying that the Ukraine problem cannot be solved through military action. This is true, but it ignores that the negotiating position of the rebels can be significantly improved through a few more months successfully prosecuting it!
best way out of this dilemma - push EU and ukraine to let novrossiya on the negotiating table and speak for itself.