Just as I’m complaining how much of what we’re hearing about the war in Ukraine is propaganda, the Institute for the Study of War produces a useful factsheet on the war. Here’s a sample:
Key Takeaways
- Zelensky does not imminently risk losing all of Ukraine.
- Most Ukrainian cities have not been destroyed.
- Ukrainian law prohibits holding elections in wartime (unlike the US Constitution which requires it).
- Ukraine has not suffered millions of losses.
- Europe provides about as much direct aid to Ukraine as the US.
- European loans to Ukraine are backed by income from frozen Russian assets, not Ukraine.
- Ukraine did not misuse or lose half of the aid the United States has provided.
- Ukraine repeatedly invited Putin to negotiate in early 2022.
It is extensively footnoted which I appreciate.
In many ways it’s a very coy document—it is very carefully phrased. I’ll leave it to the reader to discern the ways in which that is the case.
One of the areas in which I have particular interest (bullet point seven) includes this passage from the document referenced in the footnote:
Despite the changes made to EEUM inventory processes and the improvement of delinquency rates in Ukraine since February 2022, the DoD did not fully comply with EEUM program requirements for defense article accountability in a hostile environment.
and
The DoD did not fully comply with EEUM program requirements in a hostile environment to ensure defense articles transferred to Ukraine are being stored, secured, and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of the relevant transfer agreements and Chapter 8 of the SAMM.
Consequently, a more objective phrasing of the bullet point might be that Ukraine did not misuse or lose half of the aid the United States has provided directly to Ukraine as far as we know.
Still it’s a very handy summary as far as it goes.
Sounds like they one by one refute the claims made by Trump. As many have pointed out Trump just says stuff. Most fo the time its stuff to easily look up to find he is wrong, like the claim Zelensky is a dictator and refuses to hold elections. While he does this all of the time and I sort fo understand your apparent decision to ignore what he says and watch what he does, I think that is wrong since his supporters believe what he says and that is driving policy sometimes or at the very least public support of policy.
Steve
I don’t think the Constitution requires elections in war time. Congress has power to move the election date; the main Constitutional impediment is that the President’s term expires on January 20th. If a new President (or Vice President) is not qualified by that date for whatever reason (but in this case, for want of an election because the election date has been moved to a later date), Congress has the power “by law” to declare who will act as President or how a President will be selected. Current law states that the Speaker of the House becomes President on that date, assuming they resign from Congress.
Zelenskyy imposed martial law on Ukraine in Feb 2022 when Russia invaded the country. Under provisions of Ukraine’s constitution presidential elections cannot be held under martial law. However, once such a law expires said elections can be re-instituted. However, Zelenskyy extended martial law in Aug 2023, which then extended his presidency beyond its official time.
I do agree much of the info and “news” reported about the Russian/Ukrainian War is vague, contradictory, and therefore can easily fall into the column of “propaganda,” depending on the derived source. Consequently, while interesting, the takeaways posted are not necessarily factual or even convincing – similar to the remarks made by our current US president.
Jan:
“Martial”.
I’ll correct the spelling if you like.
Please do, Dave.
jan: Zelenskyy extended martial law in Aug 2023
The Ukrainian parliament voted overwhelmingly to extended martial law in 2023, not Zelensky. Under the Ukrainian constitution, elections cannot be held, and Zelensky remains in office.
I dislike going after the source, but the ISW isn’t a neutral observer (just check who founded it and sits on its board), and this is an example of the ISW misinforming based on the facts.
1. No, but Ukraine is at risk of a catastrophic collapse of its army in the next 24 months. Defeat in wars of attrition don’t have to end with total loss of territory — ask the Germans in 1918, the allies hadn’t even taken a single inch of German territory when Germany was defeated.
2. Most cities haven’t been destroyed, but the scale of destruction is immense. The world bank estimates the cost of reconstruction in Ukraine is $500 billion dollars.
3. Similarly on the number of losses. Its not millions, but the most conservative estimates using obituary/probate trackers show about 125K killed, for a population of 30-40 million. On a per capita basis this approaches American fatilities in WWII. We don’t know how many have been maimed, but statistics from other wars would suggest in order of 500K.
4. Yes, Europe has secured their loans to Ukraine using Russian assets. Its the fault of the previous administration to not think about this point. What guarantees the US government should have / has secured?
5. If the point about the negotiations is who provoked who. Please refer to John Mearsheimer who predicted such a war as has occured back in 2016 for a contrary take of who’s at fault.
If it is about who should be at the negotiating table. Recall Zelensky signed a decree banning negotiations with Putin. Trump is just respecting Zelensky’s decree.
6. I actually agree on the accessment that the EU contributed as much non-military aid as Ukraine. If you consider the damage due to damanged EU-Russia trade, nordstream, the Europeans have suffered more economically then the US.
All I can say is all the emotions coming out is the reaction to reality coming in that the West will “lose”; and assigning responsibility/cost for the “stab in the back”.
PS: The twentieth amendment is explicit that Congress cannot extend its own term via legislation (like the President). Congress can change election dates, but come January 3rd, the existing House of Representatives is no more; and unlike the Senate, there is no legal means to fill a vacancy in the House without a district election.
“The Ukrainian parliament voted overwhelmingly to extended martial law in 2023, not Zelensky.”
There you go again introducing facts into the discussion. Actually, they vote every 90 days to extend so they have voted many times to do so. The last vote was in January. 315 in favor and 11 against.
https://odessa-journal.com/martial-law-and-mobilization-in-ukraine-have-been-extended-again
Steve
“Recall Zelensky signed a decree banning negotiations with Putin.”
In context that was immediately after Putin declared that the territory they invaded and occupied was formally part of Russia “forever”. Zelensky has talked about being willing to negotiate with Putin since then but Putin has said Zelensky holds his office illegitimately. This appears to be part of the Russian misinformation campaign that Trump and his followers have bought into, ignoring that the Ukrainian government has authorized maintaining martial law, overwhelmingly, every 90 days. It should also be noted that Zelensky offered to meet with Putin before the invasion and also in the weeks after.
Not sure what there is to negotiate about. Russia says it’s keeping all the land it took. Ukraine wants it back.
Steve
The ISW is a Kagan-Nuland operation. That’s the Nuland who ran the coup on the ground in Kiev. The Nuland of “f*** the Europeans” fame.
U.S. is actively both developing and field testing drone warfare systems with the Ukrainians and it’s just a little difficult to believe that our military wants this relatively low cost operation to come to an end.
This is all just horse trading over territory, money, assets…..lives.