Well, no war started in Ukraine yesterday. Will that persist?
There are some reports of what is being characterized as a “provocation”—in the case that I read a kindergarten in Donbas being shelled by “rebels”.
There doesn’t seem to be any way of determining who is provoking whom or even whether the “provocation” actually took place.
It’s a dangerous situation. What strikes me about it is how differently NATO is responding to this than it did to Syria. In Syria it sided with the rebels against the like it or not legitimate government of Syria. In the case of Ukraine they’re siding with the Ukrainian government against separatists. That the present government of Ukraine replaced the like it or not legitimate government of Ukraine under circumstances which some have claimed was a Western-supported putsch adds to the complexity and irony of the situation.
The most compelling argument Russia will launch a major campaign is logistics don’t lie; and that the current Russian force posture is not sustainable beyond a few months — similar to the US force posture in the Middle East prior to the Iraq War in 2003.
The implication is if force isn’t used in a couple of months, Russia won’t do it for a year or more; the Ukraine / NATO knows that and would refuse to seriously negotiate, resulting in a loss of face for Russia.
If one had to question the argument; it would be (a) is the intelligence that forces have been moved around correct (b) is the assumption that its not sustainable correct? (c) whether Russia could repeat it in a high frequency manner.
I suppose we will find out soon.