Another aspect I heard, and have no way of knowing, you would have to understand Ukrainian pretty well:
Apparently Zelensky (remember, he started as a comedian) is very good at speaking in a way that mocks how Putin speaks. I doubt he does it all the time, but I can imagine how that would piss off Putput.
Lets say China starts overtly flying weapons to Russian front lines.
How does Ukraine act?
If it intercepts arms in route, that would likely bring China more directly into the conflict.
If it lets weapons funnel into Russia, it might lose the war.
Alternatively, Chinese weapons being used in the conflict will be a good testing ground for how capable they are. Will the Pentagon give away its secrets trying to combat those arms?
Oh, and this:
In reply to pheller :
No way to intercept, they share a border. They are unlikely to supply any Chinese unique weapons, likely more ammo, missiles etc. Chinese weapons will have a lot of Chinese writing on them, so that creates an issue with more complicated weapons. Artillery pieces would likely be the most sophisticated things. Maybe tanks, if they have direct copies (I think they have been making their own for a long time now).
The overland route from Manzhouli to Moscow via rail would probably take awhile.
Do we know where the CCP produces the majority of its military equipment? I'd think most of it is stationed near Taiwan and the SCS.
Need I point out the lessons that should have been learned from having chinese tires on your russian military vehicles?
In the case of Ukraine vs Russia, NATO has been equipping Ukraine with weapons that are superior to what the russians brought to the party. Being able to shoot your bombs further than your enemy can shoot his is a big advantage.
Is China going to leapfrog NATO's weapons?
Regardless of how well the Ukranians do, there will come a point where russia is pushed back into their former borders and they can stay there forever lobing mortars into Ukraine, while Ukraine is prohibited from launching anything over the russian border for fear of a nuclear response. This will leave a permanent No Man's land of about 70-80 miles wide.
In reply to pheller :
I'm sure "we" know.... but we here I would doubt. I would also bet there would be targeting options in our military for that JIC scenario.
In reply to aircooled :
A what if question:
Has China's military equipment been maintained any better than Russia's equipment? Is China's military complex less corrupt than Russia's ?
It would certainly expose China capabilities, but like mentioned previous, how much is China going to get involved?
If they only provide stuff that we already know about, then more than likely we'll supply something to counter it.
It would be a great sales tactic for the Chinese is they could demonstrate some sort of battlefield superiority.
I have a lot of trouble with the idea that support for Ukraine has waned. I am not sure this is accurate. It hasn't waned for me and mine. See below:
Lots more, but that last one is amazing
aircooled said:An observation that is relevant to recent discussions:
---------
Russian President Vladimir Putin likely continues to suffer from confirmation bias in his belief that Russia’s will to fight will outlast the West’s will to support Ukraine. The Financial Times (FT) cited unnamed officials close to the Kremlin stating that Putin assesses that “Russia is more committed to the war than the West is to Ukraine and [is] resilient enough to see out the economic pain.”[18] Unnamed Kremlin sources also told FT that Putin’s demands for loyalty over competence among elites is forcing them to refrain from being honest with him about the progress of the war, and noted that Putin gets information of “poor” quality as a result. Sources also revealed that most of Putin’s presidential administration and economic cabinet expressed that they do not support this war but use lies as a survival tactic, with only a small number of officials resigning since the start of the invasion. One longtime insider also observed that Putin is of “sound mind” and is “reasonable,” which supports ISW’s February 5 assessment that he is a highly calculated actor who places considerable emphasis on eliminating risks.[19] Insiders also revealed that Putin also withheld his plans to launch a full-scale invasion in February 2022 and his plans to occupy Crimea in 2014 from his closest advisors, with his circle of advisors recently tightening even more. The insider information indicates that Putin is prepared for Russia to suffer through a costly and exhausting protracted war under the conviction that the war will tire out Western support. Putin is also likely misinformed about the effectiveness of the Western equipment on the frontlines and its ability to impede his plans for a protracted war of attrition. The combination of Putin’s beliefs about Russian staying power and expectations of the collapse of Western will with the shrinking circle of advisors and the apparent unwillingness of insiders to contradict him likely create a strong confirmation bias in Putin’s observations of Western statements and outreach. Putin is likely to prioritize any indications of waning Western support or hesitancy over statements or indications of Western toughness or determination if this hypothesis is correct. Western leaders would do well to consider the likelihood that confirmation bias of this sort is shaping Putin’s perceptions in their own public and private statements and actions.
Not exactly a refutation of the above, but certainly a different perspective, from Graham Allison in FP.
Noddaz said:In reply to aircooled :
A what if question:
Has China's military equipment been maintained any better than Russia's equipment? Is China's military complex less corrupt than Russia's ?
I don't really know, but I would tend to guess they are much less corrupt. Entirely different society. Russia seems to essentially based on suffering(!) and getting what you can get. China is more based on "doing it for the people / country". I am sure there is still corruption but I think it is more in the form of who gets what valued position in government. China is of course very harsh on those that are seen as working for themselves and not "the people" (with some twisted definitions higher in the party I am sure).
I would not expect Chinese equipment to be in the sorry state that the Russian's is. They are very unlikely to supply advanced equipment though. Both because of difficulty in training, but I am sure they don't want the Russians learning of any of their advancement. They are more sort of "frenimies" than allies.
02Pilot said:Not exactly a refutation of the above, but certainly a different perspective, from Graham Allison in FP.
I found it kind of strange, this being a current article, that he wrote
And as both Russia and Ukraine prepare new, major offensives for the near future, other developments seem to favor Ukraine....
It's a bit like I heard on the news last weekend, talking about both sides preparing for a spring offensive. Does anyone not know that Russia is currently in the middle of an offensive? Yeah, it's kind of hard to tell I know. It seems highly unlikely the Russians will be able to mount any sort of meaningful offensive in the spring (other than more drones etc.)
A bit off the point here, but I was also watching a bit of show on Washington (the president) and they were talking about the Revolutionary War. The comment by one of the historians kind of hit home (and we have mentioned here a few times). He said something along the lines of: "The British had the distinct disadvantage in that the Americans were fighting for the survival of their country, on their soil"
I like the destroyed tanks in front of the embassy thing!
Not sure I would love the painted street thing, if I had to drive through it.
Noddaz said:In reply to aircooled :
A what if question:
Has China's military equipment been maintained any better than Russia's equipment? Is China's military complex less corrupt than Russia's ?
If their sister ship(Liaoning) to the Admiral Kuznetsov is any indicator, they take way better care of their military equipment.
If this is the "big" Russian offensive right now, I'd assume they get steamrolled by the Ukrainian forces once they are fielding western tanks and IFVs.
Maybe that is why China is calling for a ceasefire right now, the Russians don't want to admit their weak position, so it is easier coming from a third party.
Yes, as noted previously, this spring will be very revealing. If the Ukrainians can show the ability to recapture territory, and at least show themselves to be far more capable then the Russians, it will put some interesting pressures on Russia and may lead them to some actual motivation to negotiate. It will also motivate the Ukrainians NOT to negotiate, but, not entirely their decision.
aircooled said:I like the destroyed tanks in front of the embassy thing!
It is a shame that the Ukrainians cannot leave them within sight of the Russians on the front line.
aircooled said:Yes, as noted previously, this spring will be very revealing. If the Ukrainians can show the ability to recapture territory, and at least show themselves to be far more capable then the Russians, it will put some interesting pressures on Russia and may lead them to some actual motivation to negotiate. It will also motivate the Ukrainians NOT to negotiate, but, not entirely their decision.
Thing is, if they can show they can consistently recapture territory, there's probably a better chance of them continuing to get more weapons from allies than if it just ends up being a multi-year stalemate. Crimea might end up being the only sticking point.
In reply to aircooled :
The Chinese Han breed can barely stand the rest of China's population, let alone the rest of the planet; I can imagine what they privately think of russians. They are not going to do well with russians if this war starts to hurt them.
eastsideTim said:Maybe that is why China is calling for a ceasefire right now, the Russians don't want to admit their weak position, so it is easier coming from a third party.
Cease fire? Now? In their moment of triumph?
I am getting a vision of a drunk who just lost all the bar fights, threatening to kick everyone's ass. They have proven time and again to be two parts bluster and one part failure, and their resorting to desperation moves this early is telling.
I'm hoping that Ukraine can build a temporary beachhead on the left bank at the Kakhovka Reservoir and plug the intake of the Crimea Canal. That will be the cheapest thorn they can throw at the Nazi Ruskies.
VolvoHeretic said:I'm hoping that Ukraine can build a temporary beachhead on the left bank at the Kakhovka Reservoir and plug the intake of the Crimea Canal. That will be the cheapest thorn they can throw at the Nazi Ruskies.
Ukraine has been avoiding hitting civilian infrastructure where possible to maintain the "see, we're the good guys" narrative. If they wanted to impede water flow via the canal, it's only a HIMARS strike away. Even if they did, the impacts would be years away; to do so would be 1) suggesting that the war could go on that long, and 2) that Crimea will still be in Russian hands for the foreseeable future.
Per the BBC, Zelensky now wants to talk directly to the Chinese.
There are a couple interesting questions to be asked here. First, what's in this for China? On the one hand, they're poised to start supplying Russia with actual military equipment (instead of just the dual-use tech and components they are now), which means revenue and influence. On the other, they're saying they want to see a cease-fire and respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty (they are unclear on whose definition of these they favor). My reading is that they're trying to establish themselves as a diplomatic alternative to the West, which is seen in some parts of the world - mostly the Third World - as a less-than-honest broker. Promoting peace (of a sort) in Ukraine would, if it comes to anything, produce several favorable results: an increase in diplomatic standing among third parties, a lowering of energy costs, and possible economic opportunities in helping to rebuild Ukraine (occupied or not) and Russia's military. If the talks don't produce a resolution, they will still improve China's image with some, and the longer this goes on, the more leverage the Chinese gain over Russia. They really have nothing to lose by pursuing this approach.
Second, why in Zelensky engaging with China? I don't think he has any particular reason to expect a positive result, at least not one based on Ukraine's stated war aims; if China was willing to support the full return of Ukrainian territory, it would be taking a very different approach here. Still, Zelensky does gain a potentially useful back-channel to Putin, allowing possibly more direct talks between the Russian and Ukrainian governments without having to do it in public, and away from the prying, judging eyes of the West. For all of Zelensky's rhetoric about looking Westward, I'm sure he resents some of the pressures being exerted, and having another option gives him more room to maneuver with his Western partners ("Look, if you keep badgering me about corruption and stalling on aid, I'm just going to go deal with this through the Chinese.") Longer term, he may be considering his options for after the 2024 US election as well. Brokering a deal through China is also going to be much more acceptable to Putin than doing so through the West, so perhaps in that sense it improves the chances somewhat.
I don't expect a deal to result from these contacts, but adding the Chinese to the equation will definitely complicate the chess board somewhat. That Zelensky is publicly interested in engaging with them reinforces my prior assessment that he is nominally Western-leaning, but first and foremost an astute political operator who likes to keep his options open. When his only options were in the West, naturally that's where he looked, but if new possibilities appear, he is likely to consider them, at least in the short term.
Chinese plan. One wonders about the first one, in relation to Russia (!). The second one clearly seems to be pointed at NATO (so I guess defense pacts are a bad thing?). As someone I heard noted, the Chinese don't really want Russia to become stronger, but they do really want them to remain being "the bad guy". The grain export part should be noted. China apparently owns a LOT of farmland in southern Ukraine.....
-----------------------
▪️respect for the sovereignty of all countries, observance of international law and the UN Charter;
▪️Rejection of the Cold War mentality and adherence to the principle that "the security of one country should not be ensured at the expense of others";
▪️cessation of hostilities, avoidance of escalation;
▪️resumption of peace talks as "the only viable solution";
▪️resolution of the humanitarian crisis;
▪️protection of civilians and prisoners of war;
▪️Ensuring the safety of nuclear power plants;
▪️countering the threat of the use of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons;
▪️promotion of grain export within the framework of the Black Sea Grain Initiative;
▪️the termination of unilateral sanctions, which "do not solve current problems, but create new ones";
▪️supporting the stability of production chains and supply chains, refusing to use the world economy for political purposes;
▪️Contribute to post-conflict reconstruction.
You'll need to log in to post.
