3 ms·

I would like to believe it too but western economic sanctions have overall done little. Russia is still finding takers for its gas (India and China notably but

I would like to believe it too but western economic sanctions have overall done little. Russia is still finding takers for its gas (India and China notably but even European countries are still actually buying through third parties). It has found new allies in Africa. Plus it’s highly likely they will end up with territorial gain one the dust settles. The war also highlighted some weaknesses and a general unpreparedness of the western allies. The cost in human lives was high but I’m not convinced you can really call it a strategical defeat at this point sadly.

stnikolauswagne 2y ago
If this is not a strategic defeat then I struggle to think of what a defeat would actually look like. Ukrainian Troops entering the Kremlim? They managed to: -get Sweden and Finland to finally join Nato -completely demolish their entire military export potential -lose half their warchest because they kept it in foreign banks -lose all kinds of prestige the „mighty“ russian military had -severely diminish the arms stocks they had left over from the soviet union -lose the flagship of one of their fleets to a nation without a navy -publically had one of their mercenary companies march on their capital in revolt In exchange the land might gain from this is going to be completely devastated from the war. Compare all of this to the 2014 fiasco where they ended up with crimea in exchange for some minor-ish sanctions,
- RandomThoughts3 2y ago
  > -completely demolish their entire military export potential Which buyer have they lost? I fail to see any. Most of their customers distrust the US and Turkey didn’t denounce their contracts as far as I know. > -lose all kinds of prestige the „mighty“ russian military had Did they? That’s unclear to me. Wagner is in more countries than ever. > -severely diminish the arms stocks they had left over from the Soviet Union Their defence industry output is the highest it has ever been and wasn’t stopped by the various embargo they are under. > -publically had one of their mercenary companies march on their capital in revolt Before Putin very publicly showing that he is still the sole master of the country. With Russian propaganda on the ground, it wasn’t ever a minor setback for them. Plus, give it six months more and they might have humiliated the west by actually mostly winning the war with Ukraine which everyone say they would never win. I know the western media needs to parrot that Russian is the complete loser here to keep support high but the reality doesn’t seem that clear to me. Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying it’s an overwhelming victory from Russia. I’m saying that if you look at it like if Russia had overwhelming lost, you will completely misanalyse both the situation today and its implication for the future.
  - klibertp 2y ago
    > Plus, give it six months more [...] mostly winning the war I'd agree even two weeks ago, but then Kursk happened. So far, Russia's response to that has been weak. While it will be hard for Ukraine to use that as a foothold to advance deeper into Russia due to geography (mountains and rivers, I'm told), it will also be challenging for Russia to take back the territory. It's also not a big enough threat to "endanger the existence of the Russian state", so they probably won't be using tactical nukes there. With that, "winning" is going to be very hard - it looks much more like a tie now. What are your thoughts on that?
    - RandomThoughts3 2y ago
      The US election will be key. Trump already said he wasn’t going to maintain the founding at the same level of help as today. Germany is already pulling out. Ukraine is entirely dependent of foreign founds to sustain its campaign. Plus the situation regarding troops on the ground didn’t change. Ukraine didn’t rotate enough and is reluctant to conscript more. Soldiers are tired and morale is low. Kursk is there to try to extend the front and have Russia pull troops out of the north. It’s mostly guerilla warfare on a weakly protected area. They don’t have the man power nor the logistic means required to prevent Russia from retaking the region but doing so means that Russia will stop pushing further into Ukraine for some time. It was sorely needed but it’s a stopgap measure not a complete revirement unless something else happens. It has changed the timeline however. I expect Russia to stall until the US election to see if it’s better to enter negotiations now or keep fighting.
rsynnott 2y ago
I mean, if you’re Russia, being totally dependent on China is probably not a good outcome for you, and that seems to be where things are ending up. If nothing else you’d be depending on China remaining on-side forever, whereas in fact you’d assume China will use this dependence as a bargaining chip with the US and/or Europe at some point.
- RandomThoughts3 2y ago
  > China will use this dependence as a bargaining chip with the US and/or Europe at some point. You are misunderstanding how China views itself and its current position. They don’t really bargain this way anymore and especially not when it comes to country bordering them and they consider in their sphere of influence. Most analysts seem to think that China is not very happy about what Russia is doing. It means they will probably put pressure on Russia for an end to the war. I expect them to try to be leading and hosting the negotiation to show that they are a diplomatic power nowadays. I don’t expect them to negotiate an end of their support with the US however. They still share a common goal with Russia after all. They both want to limit the US influence in their direct neighbourhood.

stnikolauswagne 2y ago

If this is not a strategic defeat then I struggle to think of what a defeat would actually look like. Ukrainian Troops entering the Kremlim? They managed to: -get Sweden and Finland to finally join Nato -completely demolish their entire military export potential -lose half their warchest because they kept it in foreign banks -lose all kinds of prestige the „mighty“ russian military had -severely diminish the arms stocks they had left over from the soviet union -lose the flagship of one of their fleets to a nation without a navy -publically had one of their mercenary companies march on their capital in revolt In exchange the land might gain from this is going to be completely devastated from the war. Compare all of this to the 2014 fiasco where they ended up with crimea in exchange for some minor-ish sanctions,

RandomThoughts3 2y ago
> -completely demolish their entire military export potential Which buyer have they lost? I fail to see any. Most of their customers distrust the US and Turkey didn’t denounce their contracts as far as I know. > -lose all kinds of prestige the „mighty“ russian military had Did they? That’s unclear to me. Wagner is in more countries than ever. > -severely diminish the arms stocks they had left over from the Soviet Union Their defence industry output is the highest it has ever been and wasn’t stopped by the various embargo they are under. > -publically had one of their mercenary companies march on their capital in revolt Before Putin very publicly showing that he is still the sole master of the country. With Russian propaganda on the ground, it wasn’t ever a minor setback for them. Plus, give it six months more and they might have humiliated the west by actually mostly winning the war with Ukraine which everyone say they would never win. I know the western media needs to parrot that Russian is the complete loser here to keep support high but the reality doesn’t seem that clear to me. Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying it’s an overwhelming victory from Russia. I’m saying that if you look at it like if Russia had overwhelming lost, you will completely misanalyse both the situation today and its implication for the future.
- klibertp 2y ago
  > Plus, give it six months more [...] mostly winning the war I'd agree even two weeks ago, but then Kursk happened. So far, Russia's response to that has been weak. While it will be hard for Ukraine to use that as a foothold to advance deeper into Russia due to geography (mountains and rivers, I'm told), it will also be challenging for Russia to take back the territory. It's also not a big enough threat to "endanger the existence of the Russian state", so they probably won't be using tactical nukes there. With that, "winning" is going to be very hard - it looks much more like a tie now. What are your thoughts on that?
  - RandomThoughts3 2y ago
    The US election will be key. Trump already said he wasn’t going to maintain the founding at the same level of help as today. Germany is already pulling out. Ukraine is entirely dependent of foreign founds to sustain its campaign. Plus the situation regarding troops on the ground didn’t change. Ukraine didn’t rotate enough and is reluctant to conscript more. Soldiers are tired and morale is low. Kursk is there to try to extend the front and have Russia pull troops out of the north. It’s mostly guerilla warfare on a weakly protected area. They don’t have the man power nor the logistic means required to prevent Russia from retaking the region but doing so means that Russia will stop pushing further into Ukraine for some time. It was sorely needed but it’s a stopgap measure not a complete revirement unless something else happens. It has changed the timeline however. I expect Russia to stall until the US election to see if it’s better to enter negotiations now or keep fighting.

rsynnott 2y ago

I mean, if you’re Russia, being totally dependent on China is probably not a good outcome for you, and that seems to be where things are ending up. If nothing else you’d be depending on China remaining on-side forever, whereas in fact you’d assume China will use this dependence as a bargaining chip with the US and/or Europe at some point.

RandomThoughts3 2y ago
> China will use this dependence as a bargaining chip with the US and/or Europe at some point. You are misunderstanding how China views itself and its current position. They don’t really bargain this way anymore and especially not when it comes to country bordering them and they consider in their sphere of influence. Most analysts seem to think that China is not very happy about what Russia is doing. It means they will probably put pressure on Russia for an end to the war. I expect them to try to be leading and hosting the negotiation to show that they are a diplomatic power nowadays. I don’t expect them to negotiate an end of their support with the US however. They still share a common goal with Russia after all. They both want to limit the US influence in their direct neighbourhood.