Posted on 01/02/2023 3:54:03 AM PST by tlozo
Scrambling for a strategy, Russia has resorted to targeting infrastructure in the winter with the sole purpose of making Ukrainians cold.
Russia is increasingly relying on missiles and drones to attack Ukraine, apparently abandoning any real war aims
This is a new kind of tactic and it relies on lobbing missiles and drones at civilians and civilian infrastructure with no pretense that the targets are military in nature. One of the features of this campaign can be seen in the use of Iranian drones, resulting in it resembling how Saddam Hussein’s Iraq waged war more than previous wars in Europe.
Russia carried out more missile attacks against Ukraine on New Year's Eve, with reports saying that "shortly after midnight, air raid alerts sounded in the capital, followed by a barrage of missiles that interrupted Ukrainians' small celebrations at home."
Russia’s war lacks strategy, only aim is to bring suffering - analysis
According to news source CBS, "Ukrainian officials say Russia is now deliberately targeting civilians, seeking to create a climate of fear and destroy morale.”
However, Russia’s attacks don’t seem to be reducing Ukraine’s morale, and in fact, Ukraine is as staunch in its defense as it was at the beginning of the war and has only strengthened its resolve throughout the year.
Russia likely knows that its invasion of Ukraine has had the opposite effect of what it intended in the beginning.
Moscow believed it could decapitate Kyiv in the first weeks of the war, using surprise helicopter assaults and a massive line of armored vehicles staging from Belarus. Disappointed when it failed to take Kyiv, Moscow shifted strategy to a southern strategy, destroying Mariupol and linking up Crimea to the Donbas front. Then it began annexing territory and settled in for a long war. As winter approached, Russia switched strategy again, and, suffering blows from Ukraine’s counteroffensives, decided to rely on Iranian drones and its own stocks of missiles, to target civilians in Ukraine. The historical context and beyond
It's important to look at the historical context here. Do countries usually wage war like this? Terrorizing civilians, driving them from their homes and laying waste their lands is certainly one of the archetypes of historic warfare in the medieval period or the period of Rome and other empires.
Rome destroyed Carthage by reputedly sowing salt into the land. Ancient warfare was full of examples of mass destruction, such as what Alexander the Great did to Persepolis or Tyre. Cities would be razed and the inhabitants sold into slavery.
Russia’s initial campaigns did lead to destruction, and the claims that Russia has transferred thousands of Ukrainian children to Russia could be seen as an attempt to lay waste to Ukraine and transfer its inhabitants. However, Moscow has largely been stopped by Ukraine’s army and shifted strategy.
Can Moscow’s war then be compared to other examples of sieges and wars of attrition?
Israel and Egypt fought a war of attrition between 1967 and 1973. Iran and Iraq bludgeoned each other to exhaustion in the 1980s. In the Uruguayan civil war, the siege of Montevideo lasted almost ten years from 1843 to 1851. When the Western powers fought Nazi Germany and Japan, they subjected both countries to massive bombing. The US also ordered Operation Linebacker II, the Christmas bombing of Hanoi, in 1972, to bring Vietnam back to the “peace” table. So does Moscow’s strategy have parallels with these examples?
Similar to the “war of the cities” between Iraq and Iran, when Iraq used its air force to terrorize Iran’s cities in the Iran-Iraq war, Russia is trying to terrorize Ukraine’s civilians. Iraq likely knew it wouldn’t win the war by harassing Iran’s civilians, it merely wanted to inflict suffering on them.
Russia also seems intent merely on inflicting suffering. This isn’t “strategic” or “precision” bombing. Russia is targeting infrastructure in the winter purposely to make Ukrainians cold. Moscow is using drones that don’t have a large warhead to terrorize people more than “win” a war.
This means Russia’s policy today lacks strategy. It’s plausible Moscow may be planning a new offensive in February or that it could be searching for some kind of strategy and tactic, but Russia also knows that Ukraine is continuing to receive western arms.
With each passing day, Ukraine receives better weapons and Russia remains the same. Russia can’t outproduce the West and doesn't even appear to be trying to attrition the West in Ukraine. For instance, it doesn’t appear Russia is going after Himars or other ordnance the Ukrainians possess. Iranian drones are not being used in complex swarms. Russia seems to prefer to strike at soft targets, not trying to defeat Ukraine’s forces. Putin's Happy New Year
Russia’s New Year’s message was partly about normalcy and partly about the war. Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared alongside soldiers. His was a message of defiance and conspiracy in which he portrayed the West as waging a conflict against Russia. This is a new kind of interpretation for Moscow.
It invaded Ukraine and caused millions to suffer, but it is the victim, in its own analysis.
A message of strength was broadcast on other Russian media, portraying Russia as having weathered the storm of Western sanctions and aggression, even as Russia is the one doing the aggression.
This attempt to transform the Ukraine war into a defensive war in which Russia is the victim is part of the Moscow narrative. Having annexed areas of Ukraine, Russia can now pretend to be “defending” its lands. Moscow has claimed it won’t conduct peace talks if the annexed areas are on the table. In essence, it is trying to force Ukraine to negotiate over how much land Ukraine will lose.
If the Moscow mentality continues along this line, portraying the Ukraine war as a defensive war, and lobbing missiles and drones at Ukraine to keep Ukraine on the defensive as well, it’s not clear what the way out of the war will be.
Some western politicians and experts are keen on claiming that all wars end in diplomacy and talks. This is also the message of former German leader Angela Merkel who claimed recently that it was better to have tried diplomacy with Moscow before the war, even if it failed.
However, it’s not true that all wars end in diplomacy. The Confederacy wasn’t defeated with diplomacy, and neither was Germany in 1945. Some wars don’t end with peace talks. Some do. Moscow is gambling on the fact that eventually its war in Ukraine, waged entirely in Ukraine and causing Ukraine to suffer, will result in talks that legitimize Moscow’s actions.
This is the “frozen” conflict strategy it has used elsewhere before, such as in Georgia. If the long-term strategy for Moscow is a frozen front line, and continually shelling Ukraine’s cities to cause suffering, then the West and Ukraine will have to come up with a way to reduce this threat.
Countries like Israel, faced with enemies that lob missiles at their civilian areas, have constructed complex integrated air defenses. Even Israel has learned that these have a limit, that they are costly in the long run.
Even if air defenses can stop the Moscow campaign of spreading suffering, they won’t likely end the war.
I am not at all critical of the American service men and women who are valiant, courageous and perhaps the most honorable soldiers in the world. However, I am critical of the neo-con ruling class that has brought so much death and destruction to the world in the last 25 years.
It is possible to support our men and women in uniform AND criticize the government.
Maybe if I hadn’t come to the realization that GWB pulled the wool over my eyes after 911, I would be more trusting of the current party line regarding Ukraine.
Speaking in her interview for “Die Zeit”, published on December 7, German ex-Chancellor Merkel said the following: “The 2014 Minsk Agreement was an attempt to buy time for Ukraine. Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today. Ukraine in 2014-2015 and Ukraine today are not the same.” According to the ex-Chancellor, “it was clear for everyone” that the conflict was suspended and the problem was not resolved, “but it was exactly what gave Ukraine the priceless time.”
If you want to know what is going on in Ukraine, you need to inform yourself and looking up those statements would be a good way to start.
This story is crap. Russia’s approach is much more straightforward than the US. What they didn’t count in evidently, was the insane level of support the West is willing to provide, which will cause endless hardship for all.
Progressive, Liberal, Bernie Fan, Lee Hu Fang who goes by the name Lee Fang? Who is a contributing writer at The Nation and a writer at progressive outlet the Republic Report? Okay
Fang has been described as a "liberal" by The New York Times, and as both "liberal" and "progressive" by Salon. Liberal commentator Jonathan Chait described Fang as "left-wing" and wrote "Like many Bernie Sanders supporters, Fang often lacerates mainstream liberals both for insufficient populist zeal and, on occasion, for excessive focus on identity at the expense of class. His views on economics put him well to the left of the Democratic Party, while his views on race and gender would sit comfortably in the middle of it, and often put him at odds with fellow leftists."
According to Fang, "I like hanging out with fully grassroots Tea Party activists because, for the most part, whatever their motivations are, they're just upset about society and they want to do something about it which, at the core, I respect even though I pretty much disagree with their worldview."
I personally enjoyed Ukraine’s attacks on Russia over the weekend. I hope your Russian friends and family are thrilled to get a taste of their own terrorism hitting them in their cities and neighborhoods.
Disappointing the J-Post has become another outlet for propo articles.
Its the most moronic argument for the simple reason, if that was the strategy, why were no weapons sent to Ukraine from 2014-2016, until the new Trump administration in 2017 for the first time sent weapons-javelins to Ukraine.
U.S. President Barack Obama wants peace negotiations with Russia to run their course before deciding to send “lethal defensive” arms to help Kyiv against the recent attacks by Russian-supplied separatists in eastern Ukraine. Feb 10, 2015
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/wont-arm-ukraine-until-peace-process-finishes-obama-says-after-meeting-with-merkel
This is a fascinating comment posted to a thread about Ukraine/Russia.
If one played the simple word substitution game, one would have "Russia together with the Donbas separatists targeted and defeated both Zelensky and MATO to end their terror campaigns against Russian-speaking Ukrainians. They currently operate bases in Ukraine with thousands of troops (still) there keeping the peace, rebuilding the country."
The point of this comment is not to pick Russia over Ukraine in the current mess, but to show how double standards game the argument.
We -- good and faithful Americans -- bombed Serbia uner Clinton, then Iraq under Bush, destroyed much in Libya under Obama and Mrs. Clinton, and today, as you noted, still "operate out of four bases in Iraq" saying that we are "keeping the peace, rebuilding the country." We're "operating" in Syria as well, I am sure you are aware.
One observes that "we" in the guise of NATO are operating in Kosovo currently, albeit in a smaller way. And "we" are still involved in other Middle East military conflicts. And spending money like drunken Democrats. And assistant Democrats like Romney.
My point is that "we" are expending enormous sums in the trillions in such places as Afghanistan which could be characterized by some as twenty years of waste and "cut and run" under Biden, as well as your "rebuilding" Iraq assertion as somehow a productive use of US dollars.
It is possible that one can see both Ukraine and Russia as unworthy members of the world community, but in the moment "we" are funneling enormous sums of money financed by adding to the national debt so that "we" can.... Fill in whatever blanks your goals are.
I wish we were not wasting our dollars across this messy world, under Democrats and Republicans alike. Non-NATO Ukraine and non-NATO Russia can duke it out, and what comes, comes.
Reality has clearly shown (again!) that Obama and Merkel are lying morons and appeasement just makes everything worse.
We -- good and faithful Americans -- bombed Serbia
Look up Srebrenica, and after bombing Serbia, what did we annex?
“Absolute BS on your part to equate Iraqi Civil war deaths with US operations.”
Yeah, it’s just a PURE COINCIDENCE that all this death and destruction happened while our Pure Minded Humanitarian Peacekeepers happened to be in Iraq passing out lollipops.
PURE COINCIDENCE.
Whatever. You keep spouting your Russian propaganda. You seem very unamerican. Certainly not a conservative that’s for sure. No wonder you support Biden. I always wondered why you loved Biden so much. Now I know.
You’re an uninformed war monger and if you are an example of a conservative who in their right mind would want to be one.
What, dear old Seth misses in his lousy article is the real Russian strategy. The real strategy is for Russia to control the nine chokepoints that prevented other nations from invading it, all nine of which were controlled by the USSR after WW2. After the fall of the Soviet Empire, Russia controlled only one. After the wars to date, they control four. Ukraine actually has none of these chokepoints, it is just extra space, which has also been used by the Russians over the centuries as a means of protection. But controlling Ukraine is necessary, from the Russian standpoint, because the choke points are on the other side of Ukraine from Russia. Even if Russia succeeds in Ukraine, they will not stop there, because they simply cannot stop there - not if they wish to have the same kind of security that they had built up over the course of hundreds of years. Russia used to depend upon two things in order to defend itself, in addition to massive amounts of of territory: unlimited manpower, and General Winter. The latter isn’t going anywhere, but they have anything, but unlimited manpower, now and into the foreseeable future. The simple fact is that almost every one of the former Soviet republics is at best indifferent to Russian security needs, and in some cases, they are outright hostile to it. thus, they have about half the population that they did before in order to man their army, and they also have such a low birth rate that their population will be shrinking rather dramatically over the next couple of generations. The era of unlimited Russian cannon fodder is over, and no one knows this more than Putin, and the higher levels of Russian leadership.
Oh, and the real Russian strategy concerning Ukraine is to make the place uninhabitable. Once they figured out that they wouldn’t be taking it over in a few days (because their army sucks so badly), they made the decision that Russia has traditionally made about its enemies, which is to utterly destroy them by targeting infrastructure, especially during the winter, Russia’s aim is to make it so unpleasant to live in Ukraine that the majority of the population simply leaves. Those who stay and are of fighting age will be viewed as enemies and killed over the course of time. Of course, that does not mean that this Russian strategy will be successful, but this IS the Russian strategy. It isn’t subtle or moral, but it worked for Russia for a long time. BTW, Russia is in the process of mobilizing its population for a traditional, and perhaps its last, major offensive as a nation. They are not mobilizing 300,000 soldiers, the figure mention by Putin. No, they are mobilizing over 1 million men, something that Ukraine cannot possibly handle. As Stalin once said, “quantity has a quality all it’s own.” They intend to overcome Ukraine in the same manner that they overwhelmed everyone else that they defeated in the past several hundred years, which is to bury them in manpower. This is because Russian forces have never been modern to the extent necessary to defeat western enemies. They will simply throw manpower at the issue until the issue goes away. They had hoped to get away with it on the cheap, and they failed.
Genocides have a centuries-long and ugly history. Western as Muslim as Asian as African as....
Annexation is an interesting issue, given borders, their various changes over periods in recent history. Settling on which border and under which regime as "authentic" is obviously a flashpoint as I read different sides on this. Yours is among them, of course.
Broadening from annexation to the more general notion of self-determination as topic, the question is who is the "self" in this. And on what date? In which decade? This will not be settled between us, most obviously. We're not anywhere near players in the game. The current Biden-led administration is. The current Stoltenberg-led administration of NATO is, and Zelensky and Putin are. And the warring will be a part of settling this, in whatever way the outcome will evidence.
As to annexations, the Turkey-Kurd-Syrian strife is in part about who will "self-determine" or determine. More areas in the Middle East will erupt, it is likely. Africa's had its share. Our American "annexations" are well in our past, but they are there too. Not much is new under this sun of ours, when all is said and done.
I have no idea which side will prevail, and wait to learn the outcome. But in this time it is easy to see that realignments geopolitical are raging. And Biden's "we will lead the liberal world order" is not a winning hand in that casino. Regards.
Oh stop with your pro Russian nonsense.
He said, she said, he did, she did…..let’s look at the final chapter:
Ukraine 1991-2023 RIP , the quicker the better.
Russia was
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.