Ukraine

Laura Kuensberg questioning to Zelensky was awful. How is that wretched gobshite still employed by the BBC?

↑

Yeah the Russian economy is doing fine, 30% inflation and 21% interest rates, army recruitment down 80%.

You're forgetting that they have that industrial powerhouse that is North Korea backing them.

Posted by: elshalimo

↑

Laura Kuensberg questioning to Zelensky was awful. How is that wretched gobshite still employed by the BBC?

The problem that Kuenssberg has is that she’s just not very good. She owes her position to her access to the Tory front bench in an era of access journalism, but the world has moved on and she doesn’t have the same level of access to the other parties.

Theres a good bit on yesterday’s Quiet Riot podcast about the low quality of UK journalism, and we really need a national conversation about what we do about this. I’d argue that (as with donations to political parties), having our major media platforms owned by overseas domiciled billionaires is a national security issue…

Of course press ownership and the fact most of them are just tory propaganda organs is a real threat to society.  Blair could have delt with this but cosied up to Murdoch instead

is a real threat to society

They might have been at some point in the past, but circulation of every newspaper is tanking all over the world. i think the circulation of every newspaper in the UK is something like 2.5 million copies. Even Murdoch thinks print news is dead on its feet. 

I thought there was a reasonable theory that the main thing the Ukrainians have to do is keep grinding the Russian army down, minimise their own casualties and wait for the Russian economy to collapse?

That may have been me you remember saying this and it still holds water IMHO, Ukraine is almost always going to be outnumbered but has territorial depth that allows it to trade land in return for almost always having defenders' advantage in their engagements in the East. Basically bleeding the Russians white for every inch until they exhaust themselves. 

It's a grim, horrible way to fight and surrendering your own land to the invaders is never what you want to do but given the situation Ukraine finds itself in, it's one of the few effective overarching strategies they have available to them, they can't afford the kinds of losses the Russian can and if that means a constant state of fighting retreat so be it.        

And it's very slow work but it is working, Russian just quietly sold off a load of it's gold reserves, their cold war stockpiles are almost exhausted. The inflation and interest rates are both heading stubbornly skywards, recruitment has stalled and North Korea doesn't appear to have sent any more troops since the first 10,000 were used as cannon fodder.  Biden, on this way out of the door, ensured that Ukraine had enough US aid to last at least into the summer. And Ukrainian EW efforts along the border are apparently finally proving effective against the 600KG FAB glide bombs that Russia has been using so effectively over the last 18 months. 

Trump was Putin's ace in the hole and it may still work but fortunately for Ukraine his antics have been so obnoxious and egregious that it's prompted the rest of the 'West'  the rally round Zelensky.

This missile deal, is that being paid for with "export financing" that I've seen described as a "loan".

Is some of that possibly political for the transaction focused US?

i think the circulation of every newspaper in the UK is something like 2.5 million copies. Even Murdoch thinks print news is dead on its feet.

The other problem is that even owners of print media can't control what independently-minded editors and journos publish, which is why control of the most popular social media platforms is so important.

The algorithm does what it's told, younger people read it and the echo chamber amplifies it

Prompted bay another post elsewhere looking at teh T7C's of teh Budapest Memorandum.... 

"Ukraine: The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 The following is the text of the Memorandum on Security Assurances, known as the Budapest Memorandum, in connection with Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, signed Dec. 5, 1994. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a nonnuclear-weapon State, Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time, Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces. Confirm the following:

1. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE [Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe] Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

3. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE EIR February 21, 2014Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

4. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

5. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.

6.The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments. This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature. Signed in four copies having equal validity in the English, Russian and Ukrainian languages."

And it's all signed from each country. Does this hold any legal standing given that russia and probably soon, the US, have driven a coach and horses through it Does it oblige the US (who is increasingly looking like they DGAS) to step up? 

And it's all signed from each country. Does this hold any legal standing given that russia and probably soon, the US, have driven a coach and horses through it Does it oblige the US (who is increasingly looking like they DGAS) to step up?

Only Russia has broken its obligation (as you said). The US has always treated the Memoranda as not legally binding and presumably Russia agrees with that.

It's considered bad political form to break these agreements, which is why low-level assistance and weak economic sanctions were put in place in 2014.

I’m waiting for the bit where the US relaxes sanctions, does a mineral deal with russia and the occupied territories, then imports contractors there and exits Nato.

Ukraine then faces the dilemma of attacking not only occupying troops but US individuals too. 4d geopolitical chess, a done deal, Ukraine under the bus and putin with all the lolz. 

oh how the collective west should have been stronger after the Crimean annexation but that was then, this is now. 

Trump has "paused" military aid to Ukraine:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/04/us-military-aid-ukraine-pause-trump-zelenskyy-updates

He is in actual fact a Russian asset.

He is a vile treacherous criminal

oh how the collective west should have been stronger after the Crimean annexation but that was then, this is now.

That's the political reality. It wasn't a good decision, but political decisions and good decisions rarely coincide

Trump has "paused" military aid to Ukraine:

It's now up to the US Congress because this goes against a Presidential authority to provide military aid (which includes transport BTW). I don't know what their options are; impeachment might be one, which would put VP Vance into the Oval Office

Posted by: timba

↑

impeachment might be one, which would put VP Vance into the Oval Office

Couldn't be done last time he was in office, there's even less chance now he has a decent majority in both houses.

Couldn't be done last time he was in office, there's even less chance now he has a decent majority in both houses.

Even if it could I'm conflicted on it being a feasible option 🙂

What does a non US peace plan look like?

Agent Orange (I think we can call him that now) has also suspended US cyber operations regarding Russia. We really are through the looking glass now :/

What next? Zelenskyyyyy resigns, replaced by a poodle who goes to Washington, minerals handed over, Russian mining firms move in, champagne and caviar in Moscow and Mar a Lago ??

What next? Zelenskyyyyy resigns, replaced by a poodle who goes to Washington, minerals handed over, Russian mining firms move in, champagne and caviar in Moscow and Mar a Lago ??

At any other time that would sound ridiculously unlikely.  These days? Not so much ☹️ 

Agent Orange (I think we can call him that now)

We can go with his previous criminal case identifier of "Individual 1" or his actual russian asset name "Krasnov". 

There willll be a link in the DT thread so Ill not put it here, though the two are intertwining now. 

Russia can’t destroy Ukraine, the USA can.

I said a few weeks back that Ukraine could win this unless Agent Orange hands it to Russia on a plate.

Is there enough guns and ammo within the EU to make a significant impact without the US.?

Do a deal with Zalensky in which EU memeber states  go all in and provide everything thats available this year.

Then as a recripical deal , agree on mineral agency rights for the rare earth metals that both Putin and Trump want. Thus getting financial recompense for the military hardware and shafting the orange baboon. 

If Russia really is down to doing infantry assults in a Yugo 4x4 and using donkeys to bring in ammo to the front lines , plus relying on the NK powerhouse to provide men and materials then a load of modern western hardware would surely tip the balance 

The real worry is Agent Orange suspending sanctions. That could be a massive blow.

a load of modern western hardware would surely tip the balance 

Leopards, ATACMS, Abrams, F16. How many times can this be repeated?

It's worse than anyone expected. Trump isn't even trying to disguise who's side in the Russia Vs Ukraine war he is on.

There is no doubt that Europe are on their own and needs to spend huge sums on military defence away from the USA.

Standby for nuclear proliferation across Europe, especially in the east and Scandinavia. Some of Putin's neighbours will see this as their only option to deter future Russian land grabs.

Leopards, ATACMS, Abrams, F16. How many times can this be repeated?

those are several generations old

(and arguably we sent them far too late)

Posted by: blokeuptheroad

↑

Standby for nuclear proliferation across Europe

The Middle East and Asia too. Iran is facing a choice of making a sprint for the bomb, or losing its influence in the region. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc. will want to follow. Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan depend on the U.S. for security. They are all capable of developing nuclear weapons fairly quickly. Other countries like Vietnam and the Philippines have territorial disputes with China. If the region goes nuclear, they will have to consider following.

All cause of the price of eggs, eh.

Report

Standby for nuclear proliferation across Europe

I'm not sure that's very feasible. France is the only EU country with an independent nuclear capability and that took decades to develop. Even the UK doesn't have a truly independent capability as our nukes are highly dependent and integrated with US technology and US subsidies/funding. Even if the EU has the political will to create its own nuclear umbrella I doubt many EU citizens will be willing to swallow the financial sacrifice of building it.

I had an idea that Trump might shake things up but taking a sledgehammer to the post war consensus and backing Russia to this extent i'm not sure many predicted. I agree about the nuclear proliferation and i think it could happen quicker for some countries than we think, given their advanced engineering. And point the missiles both ways.

I cant see the american/putin love in lasting that long, Americans have been told that the reds are the enemy for generations and thats not going to be undone in a couple of months. Trump is clearly compromised (in someway or another) and the GOP is terrified of getting on the wrong side of him so he goes pretty much unchallenged.  Thats not going to last, the second they sense the tide starting to turn on the orange ball bag they'll gut him, it might take until the mid terms but it'll happen

i think it could happen quicker for some countries than we think, given their advanced engineering.

No one questions the engineering ability. It's the political will and ability of EU populations to swallow the financial and other sacrifices it will require. At a time when the world should be pouring all it's resources into mitigating and delaying climate change, instead it'll be focusing the effort and resources on building weapons of mass destruction. I doubt many voters in the EU will be willing to swallow that. 

Posted by: Caher

↑

taking a sledgehammer to the post war consensus and backing Russia to this extent i'm not sure many predicted.

We *all* predicted it.

I'm not sure that's very feasible. France is the only EU country with an independent nuclear capability and that took decades to develop.

In the 1950s, it's now a very mature and well understood technology. It's been assessed that Sweden and Germany could develop a weapon in months. Sweden actually had a clandestine Nuclear program at one time. Poland wouldn't be too far behind if they were of a mind. As regards political will or public opinion, it's probably a lot more hawkish in countries like Poland. It spends more on Defence than any other European nation and has plenty of historic reasons to fear Russia. I agree it would be a disaster for all sorts of reasons, just pointing out that the risk of it is now massively increased.

It's the political will and ability of EU populations to swallow the financial and other sacrifices it will require.

Over the last couple of weeks the US has just told every eastern European ally who've in the past they've persuaded not to pursue nuclear weapons that not only that the USA isn't coming to their aid, but is in fact going to actively support the one country that might actually invade them. I think the folks in those countries are going to be quite supportive of any effort to begin a nuclear programme. 

Should Zelensky stand down? Trump is clearly driven by personality, grudges and relationships. Should Zelensky step aside in the hope that a successor could establish a better relationship with Trump, for the good of Ukraine?

There's lots of opportunity for joint development - reducing cost and risk. I'm sure the French would be happy to sell their expertise too. 

I wonder how far/quickly this would have to go before a significant proportion of the US started to wonder why their previous allies were turning their backs on them - or would it just be spun as anti-US rather than anti-Trump?

Should Zelensky stand down?

Does he have a choice? If he sticks around Ukraine is toast, victim of Trump's infantile revenge kick. He has his faults but I think Z is bigger than that, and may sacrifice himself for the greater good. Whatever happens he will be seen as a hero.

Posted by: drj

↑

Should Zelensky stand down?

Does he have a choice? If he sticks around Ukraine is toast, victim of Trump's infantile revenge kick. He has his faults but I think Z is bigger than that, and may sacrifice himself for the greater good. Whatever happens he will be seen as a hero.

I think he does have a choice at the moment. He has already said he would ultimately stand down for the sake of a fair peace. But that's not what is being offered at the moment. He's being asked to resign because he was perceived to have insulted the great tangerine tyrant. He can't resign in advance of a deal that promises nothing but some exploitation from the US, it wouldn't be self-sacrifice (which again, i've no doubt he would do in the right circumstances), it would be pointless capitulation. Ukraine is in a difficult position even with the US proposal, because they aren't offering a realistic peace. 

Should Zelensky stand down?

Would it make any difference? Trump is still going to side with Putin, he'd just shake-down the next Ukrainian president in the same way. 

France is the only EU country with an independent nuclear capability and that took decades to develop.

My understanding is that there are two major technologies you need to master to build nuclear weapons. First, you need to be able to produce fissile material - either enriched uranium or plutonium. I think that technology is widely understood across Europe. Second, you need to be able to build explosive lenses to compress the pit of the weapon and start the chain reaction. In the 1940s, that was a major accomplishment, it took months and months to crunch the numbers to do that. With the off-the-shelf computing power available now, not such a challenge. Obviously, it will still require some decently smart people to put it all together, but the basic concepts are understood and don't have to be invented from scratch.

Of course, after that, the bombs have to be developed into an operational weapon that can be stored for years and activated in seconds, plus a delivery system has to be developed, but it wouldn't take decades to have operational weapons.

I think nuclear capability would be down the priority, as building baseline military capability will be and is the priority. In the shorter term there can be a re-jig of nuclear protection, as proposed by Macron, that could see a more euro-focussed nuclear umbrella.

I think the worrying thing for nato members, is that the US has weakened nato just purely because of his unpredictability. This must have created a break in trust with other members who cannot now fully rely on the US to respond in the way it needs to. This is a really significant strategic blow, as it disrupts and damages the deterrence of nato in Russia's favour, just through the words and equivocations of team trump. 

Posted by: kimbers

↑

those are several generations old

Fair. But from a point of experience, I'd still rather have an old piece of shit, than no piece of shit.

Delivery of a nuke could be quite simple. Launch 1000 drones a 100 of which are nuclear armed. Ukraine has shown how useless the Russian air defences are.

Trump and Putin are making the world a much more dangerous place, not Zelenskyy.

Posted by: mrchrispy

↑

I cant see the american/putin love in lasting that long,

Eventually everyone gets Trumped, and that will include JD Couch, musk, Rubio... Putin probably has a longer run than them TBF 

Ha, never trust a Trump

I see very little in the press about China's stance on all the latest shenanigans, does anyone have some worthwhile links to have a read off?

I'm honestly starting to think that China is the only one who can step in and sort out this mess, its like a bunch of squabbling school kids at the moment

Posted by: Swollen

↑

Ha, never trust a Trump

Currently I'd trust a shart more than a trump.