The Vineyard of the Saker
Why I see a war in the Donbass as (almost) inevitable
The Saker
http://thesaker.is/why-i-see-a-war-in-the-donbass-as-almost-inevitable/
See also
OVERVIEW OF HYPERSONIC WEAPONS, AUTUMN 2021
Seppo Niemi
https://katehon.com/en/article/overview-hypersonic-weapons-autumn-2021
6 comments:
Why didn't Russia partition off Donbass soon after Crimea?
All parties involved know that Donbass is lost. Russia is committed to defending that region. Kiev could prolong the pretense by not attacking it.
This is sort of like China and Taiwan. Beijing insists they are a renegade province who must return to the fold; in the meantime, Taipei receives billions in armaments from their ally. The international community accepts the pretense that Taiwan is not sovereign in order to not ruffle feathers in Beijing.
So the provocations will continue on both of these fronts. To his credit, Putin has not been as belligerent as China's leadership.
Why didn't Russia partition off Donbass soon after Crimea?
No value to Russia. Russia will only act to protect the lives and rights of Ukrainians of Russian ethnicity (against the neo-Nazis that want to eliminate them).
So the provocations will continue on both of these fronts. To his credit, Putin has not been as belligerent as China's leadership.
Sovereignty issue. Russia has no sovereignty claim on Ukraine, but China does wrt Taiwan.
But Ukraine is a strategic concern for Russia, as is Taiwan for China. These is the reason for red lines.
Did you mean to say Crimea is a strategic concern for Russia?
As for Donbass:
3,393 civilians killed (349 in 2016–2021)
13,000–13,200 killed; 29,000–31,000 wounded overall
1,414,798 Ukrainians internally displaced; 925,500 fled abroad
There is value for a Russian politician to prevent more of this in the future. Donbass has nowhere to go. Putin must have paid a price for exercising restraint.
Crimea was a top strategic priority at the time, since one of the objectives of the coup was to secure the naval base there for NATO. Russia had no choice but to act or be crippled.
Ukraine is a strategic concern for Russia owing to its proximity, and Russia has apparently made its red lines clear to the US on this.
Putin must have paid a price for exercising restraint.
There was and is a significant faction in Russia that is outraged that the government has not acted militarily on this issue.
But don't put too much emphasis on Putin in this. The Russian military, both the DOD and high command, are highly influential in setting Russian foreign and military policy, as is also the security council.
The point that The Saker makes is that Ukraine has only a supporting role in this, and the action is determined by the "West" as an ongoing attempt to neutralize Russia without a big war that wipe out Europe first and then the US, along with Russia. That leaves the world to China.
The result is driving Russia and China closer to the degree that a war against both on two fronts, and also one against Iran, so make that three fronts, would be suicidal for the West.
Dicey game by high rollers in the West, since neither Russia nor China are interested in hostilities, but they will react if their red lines are crossed.
Pretty nutty but when one considers that the stakes are world domination and all the world's resources and wealth, it's not completely irrational that elites would do this. Plus, throw in some bigotry, too.
I'm not sure the west is leading this parade. Ukraine's actions have prevented NATO from accepting them as a member. They would be obligated to defend Ukraine in case of hostilities. Given the current regime, how long would that take?
Alternatively, if there were a way to force Russia to occupy all of Ukraine, without requiring NATO intervention, Washington may be tempted to do that. Red lines can be crossed when there are patsies ready to be sacrificed. Are you listening, Taiwan?
If Russia doesn't want to be saddled with Ukraine, they better not paint themselves into a corner by issuing red lines. But they are saddled with Donbass, since there was a victory on the battlefield, Kiev refuses to negotiate, and the residents of Donbass would not trust a treaty returning them to Ukrainian rule.
Post a Comment