There hasn’t been much in the way of articles to react to today, so let’s discuss something, shall we? What is the likely outcome of the Russian-Ukraine war? Let’s consider several.
1. Russia defeats the Ukrainian military, puts down the resistance, and annexes Ukraine.
I think this scenario is possible but not the most likely.
2. Russia substantially reduces the Ukrainian military, does not eliminate the resistance, but annexes Ukraine anyway.
This, too, is possible but even less likely than the first outcome.
3. Russia substantially reduces the Ukrainian military, does not eliminate the resistance, and withdraws from Ukraine.
I think this may well be Putin’s intended objective. Or, at least I think it would be a prudent one. If the Ukrainian government is willing to make some concessions about the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasti, this may become highly likely.
4. In order to prevent any of the first three outcomes from happening, NATO enters directly into the conflict and Russia withdraws from Ukraine, weakened and humiliated.
I think this is extremely unlikely but with every passing day it seems that more in the West envision this sort of outcome actually taking place.
5. Intending to prevent any of the first three outcomes from happening, NATO enters directly into the conflict. Russia uses nuclear weapons against NATO troops in Ukraine. There is a nuclear exchange. In the ensuring conflict a billion people die.
I don’t think this is likely, either, but I think it’s more likely than #4.
I don’t see any way that Ukraine prevails in the conflict without direct NATO participation and I think a major escalation of that sort would be disastrous for all parties. Pat Lang seems to envision covert NATO against the Russians, either in Ukraine or Russia. I think that would be the effective equivalent of direct NATO participation, indeed, I think that our intelligence apparatus is sort thoroughly penetrated either by the Russians or the Chinese or both, as to make such an action ineffectual or, at least, a lot more public than he might envision.
So, what’s the likely outcome?
Note that I’m not endorsing or recommending any of these outcomes. What I would like to happen is for Russia to withdraw from Ukraine immediately and unconditionally but I think that’s the least likely outcome of all.
I’m guessing that Russia achieves its stated objectives and leaves: neutrality, demilitarization, denazification.
There aren’t many Nazis. They only got a few percent of the vote. But they are very heavily armed, and they have successfully intimidated both Poroshenko and Zelensky.
The Minsk accords are dead, and Donetsk and Luhansk will become independent countries, in their full extent, affiliated with the Russian Federation.
Russia will become profoundly isolated from western Europe, but it won’t really matter.
PS. The US is setting up Finland and Sweden to be the next victims, and the Fins and Swedes are stupid enough to fall for it.
They will win the war, destroy the military but will need to stay to stop Ukraine from joining the EU and NATO. They face a long resistance like in Afghanistan. They annex about half o Ukraine.
Steve
Should I book an emergency ticket to Cancun?
In all seriousness, I hope someone from the DOD or the Dept of Energy would brief members of Congress and our allies what a nuclear exchange would look like. From how they speak, too many decision makers and influencers don’t seem to grasp the consequences.
1 billion people would die in the initial exchange, but given the interconnected nature of our world, the subsequent disruption to food, energy, and other trade critical to life would probably lead to 3-4 billion people to die (50% of humanity) over the span of a decade.
“directly into the conflict”.
Here’s a thought, if this conflict doesn’t result in nuclear winter — determining if a state is actually at war with another state will become harder to do as technology advances.
Imagine if the NATO gave Ukraine drones. Ukraine hires mercenary operators to control them. At what point would one say NATO is directly engaging the Russians.
Would it be?
(a) the mercenaries are working in NATO territory instead of neutral territory/Ukraine
(b) mercenaries turned out to be “ex”-service members
Arial drones are one thing — but remote controlled tanks, artillery, and naval units will be feasible in the near future.
If you ask “what is Putin’s objective” and believe what seems the obvious, you get pretty much what Bob and steve suggest. I think that’s about right.
I don’t believe for a second Putin is losing it; that’s just wild speculation. So I doubt he has designs on Poland, the Baltics or Finland and Sweden. If he does then we are indeed headed towards all but, and maybe including, a nuclear exchange.
I find the question of Western response more interesting. I believe he will get a long term quagmire like Afghanistan, and we should assist in funding the resistance. Bleed him. I believe the Europeans may have awakened from their naive stupor and recognize the existential threat. Its time for “globalization” to mean more Europe and USA, and less trade with Russia and China. I hope, but not with the current administration (they are too beholden to China and progressive enviros/ultra-large corporate media), that the US recognizes that the US-China gig isn’t working. Lastly, in case no one has noticed, perhaps we will understand that this isn’t tiddly winks, as Biden and The Squad would have us believe, and we should go balls to wall on energy production. We were headed in the right direction, and then Uncle Joe showed up. That would screw with Putin big time.
So let Russia and China trade with each other. Begin de-coupling with China. Turn off Putin’s primary revenue source.
Putin will have won a pyrrhic victory. The opportunity for a glorious victory for Ukraine has been lost, or never existed. But the global economic paradigm will have changed dramatically And China is not stupid. They may start doing the moonwalk from Russia.
But fear not, people. Know that Kamala Harris this very day is concerned and championing for the LBGQ elemeno p community and wants men to be able to play women’s sports. So we got that going for us………..
“need to stay to stop Ukraine from joining the EU and NATO”.
This makes no sense. If the Russian military destroys much of Ukraine’s military infrastructures; kills a high proportion of their regular forces, and with destroyed economic infrastructure (the Ukrainian strategy of partisan guerilla warfare is unintentionally assisting in that); Ukraine won’t be able to join the EU / NATO for decades.
It can’t join the EU because the economy is and will be a total basket case and with EU membership, that implies free movement and more than half the population would relocate. The GDP per capita of Romania is $12000, Ukraine was $3800 before the war. With the infrastructure damage incurred, it could be 20 years before Ukraine even gets back to it s pre-war GDP.
As for NATO, primarily it is a military organization. If you observe a map; Ukraine is indefensible from a conventional attack by Russia. It has a 3,000 km border to Russia/Belarus which can attack from 3 sides (as shown in this war). If current trends hold, Ukraine’s army (soldiers, equipment, industry) will be destroyed in a few weeks. So how is Ukraine going to build a military to repel the next attack? Who’s going to fund that effort?
Rebuilding the military is all going to take years if not decades of work. And if Ukraine does; Russia could come and smash it all again before it is rebuilt in another war unless NATO intervenes. But NATO intervention means nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine — which NATO wouldn’t do before this war and during the war (so far). Is NATO going to change that; if so then might as well do it now and get the apocalypse over with.
Of Bob’s three stated objectives; “neutrality, demilitarization, denazification” — “neutrality”, “demilitarization” could be de-facto achieved by force and pretty soon given current trends.
The big question, Putin hasn’t revealed his hand whether his intentions are more maximalist then just smashing Ukraine’s military (and what’s necessary to support it).
Albania, the second-poorest country in Europe, has a per capita GDP of around $8, 000. I’ve been pointing out the likelihood of flight from Ukraine since the beginning of the discussion, even raised the prospect of Germany’s seeing it as an opportunity.
This is all about Putin’s perception. I didnt think we were going to invite them anyway. So far, the ability and willingness of Ukraine to fight back might even make some countries want to accept them regardless of their economic status. Anyway, real or not Putin will stay so that it doesnt happen or at least use that an excuse to stay, just like he is using it as an excuse to invade.
Steve
Forgot to ask. Does anyone know where Putin is getting those bombs and artillery shells that only kill nazis? Bombing of civilian areas isn’t an attempt at demilitarization so I ma guessing it is to kill nazis. Seriously, this is taking “smart bombs” to a whole new level.
Steve
I think its most likely a destroy and retreat outcome, but I’m not sure where the retreat lines are. The minimum would be the Donbass region, but the greater the success, the more territory will be de facto seceded to Russian control. Russia can draw lines and encourage the “NAZIS” that don’t like it to leave.