Russia's War Against Ukraine

[JudgeDredd]

The video is included and I'll watch it - thanks for the article.

Putin absolutely does not want peace.  His strategic goal has always been to take Ukraine back into Russia.

What he needs at the moment is a reprieve - to rebuild. So any peace deal he gets needs to be viewed through the eyes of "he'll be back - and in force". I suspect he's going to want to keep the Donbas - why would he want to fight for that territory again when he comes back in 5 or 10 years.

In terms of his people - if he secures Ukraine not being allowed into NATO he could call that a win. If he can keep the Donbas - all the better and especially as he'll be back.

Back in 2016 when the UK was being led out of the EU, he was rubbing his hands. And even before then, there was talk of setting up a European military force...which the UK was adamant they did not want to be part of. So lets see where that goes now.

[JudgeDredd]

That was an excellent interview 

[Sir Slash]

I agree, great interview. I think at this point, anything that stops the killing and prevents Ukraine from losing more territory, is a win for them. Nobody doubts Putin will be back, which is why we should take the time from a Peace Deal to make sure they are ready when he does.

[Crossroads]

The first words from US-Russia negotiations tell us the talks have been good and positive. Russia agreed, and added that any European peacekeepers in Ukraine would be a provocation and an escalation. But of course, dear Kremlin, but of course.

Now we have White House stating that Ukraine does not want peace, and in fact, should not have started the war in the first place.

I have no idea what sort of 4D chess this is, or is it just that when trying to understand someone's view, you'd just listen to what they say.

[JudgeDredd]

Trump

"You should've never started it

I'm going to try my best to leave the politics out of this 

Look - Trump is interested in getting Russian money back. He wants the business. Everyone talks about what a great business man he is - it's on a plate here for everyone to see. He cosied up to Putin when he was in power in 2016 and he's doubling down on that now.

I have absolutely no doubt they were sitting around the table working out how they can get business money to flow again without Putin caving in and making this Ukraine's fault.

It's shameful when they say they just want "the killing to stop". I don't think they give a shit about the deaths. I think they give even less shit about Ukraine tbh. I genuinely don't. They're simply hiding behind the real reason they want to have these talks - money.

If there are any "Trump curve balls" being thrown here - it's to fool us, not the Russians.

[Pete Dero]

Trump

"You should've never started it

I'm going to try my best to leave the politics out of this 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/17/revealed-trump-confidential-plan-ukraine-stranglehold/

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky's office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of "all new licences issued to third parties" for the future monetisation of resources.

More news outlets reported on this document so I'm inclined to believe it exists and the content is correct.

https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2025/02/19/guerre-en-ukraine-donald-trump-exige-de-kiev-des-reparations-colossales-sans-le-moindre-soutien-en-contrepartie_6553532_3210.html

un avant-contrat ressemblant à ce qu'un vainqueur exigerait d'un ennemi vaincu (a preliminary contract resembling what a victor would demand from a defeated enemy)


So because Ukraine 'started the war' they must pay reparations    .


I don't want this to be or become R&P, these are just the facts as they are known today.
I waited 2 days to post this until I had more sources than The Telegraph who were the first to report it.

[Crossroads]

I don't want this to be or become R&P, these are just the facts as they are known today.

Yeah, I saw that article too. I thought the "minerals deal" was about going forward, but no.

There's an awful lot of noise regarding Trump, I for one pretty much only read more conservative sources from US in trying to keep up with things.

National Review:

This week, Trump officials traveled to Saudi Arabia, where they met directly with their Russian counterparts to hammer out a framework for a cease-fire. Apparently, it was a productive meeting, although the concessions on offer appear to have come primarily from the American side.

Fox News's Jacqui Heinrich detailed some of the Trump team's overtures to Moscow. A successful cease-fire deal would restore the bilateral diplomatic functions and facilities frozen after Russia's second invasion of Ukraine in 2022. There would be a "softening of sanctions," too, and a "historic economic partnership" between the Kremlin and the West following the conclusion of Russia's war (read: another Russian "reset"). As for what's expected from the Russian side of this equation, that remains a mystery.

I wish to keep out of politics as well, looking at various sources and what they say and conclude. The almost unilateral conclusion seems to be that we are heading towards very interesting times.

[Crossroads]

To contribute to the thread title, here's an interesting five-minute video on lessons learned from the invasion of Ukraine:

https://rusi.org/news-and-comment/explainers/lessons-ukraine-recommendations-nato

The link also includes access to the full article.

Some observations:

• Air force and air superiority—with munitions, munitions, munitions available in large quantities.
• Anti-UAV measures at all rear echelons, using electronic and hard-kill systems. Previously, movement provided protection—now, movement attracts interest and attacks.
• Simpler and more cost-effective systems—tanks, IFVs, APCs, and artillery platforms. Numbers matter.
• Not in the video, but covered in the article—large stockpiles of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines.

[Pete Dero]

I wish to keep out of politics as well, looking at various sources and what they say and conclude. The almost unilateral conclusion seems to be that we are heading towards very interesting times.

My sources show that the only country celebrating the way we are heading is Russia.

I've seen interviews with Ukrainians on my local TV and I will let you guess how they are feeling now ...

[JudgeDredd]

Fox News's Jacqui Heinrich detailed some of the Trump team's overtures to Moscow. A successful cease-fire deal would restore the bilateral diplomatic functions and facilities frozen after Russia's second invasion of Ukraine in 2022. There would be a "softening of sanctions," too, and a "historic economic partnership" between the Kremlin and the West following the conclusion of Russia's war (read: another Russian "reset"). As for what's expected from the Russian side of this equation, that remains a mystery.

This is exactly what I was meaning in my previous - these items are bad news for the Ukrainians. Even with a peace deal - reducing sanctions and opening business channels will only help to rebuild Russia for the next invasion in 5 years.

[Jarhead0331]

Anyone who is left posting in this thread I know and trust. You are all educated, thoughtful, honest and well-meaning. More importantly, you're all loyal and valued members of the forum.  All of your thoughts and feelings on the topic are valid and justified. Since we've made the security changes to the forum, there isn't all that much random traffic. So people who are in the forum are here because they want to be.

While I very much appreciate your efforts to keep the discussion outside the bounds of what is traditionally R&P, I have confidence that you can all handle it, so I have no plans of moderating the thread at this point.

All I will say is that Trump campaigned on putting American interests first in all things and on this he received an overwhelming mandate. While putting wider strategic considerations aside for a moment and also accepting that the view is a narrow one, I think attempting to force Ukraine to repay its debts, as well as to contribute to the rebuilding of the country financially, is rational in view of the mandate, but I would hope the message would be that Russia is expected to pay its fair share of certain costs, as well. Regardless, Trump's approach to this is that Americans should not be expected to pay for the war and the reconstruction of Ukraine. i think this concept is a valid one, but the messaging thus far seems to be, shall I say, lackluster?   

It is very hard to get accurate information on what is true and what is disinformation with respect to the negotiations, so right now, I'm taking everything with a grain of salt. This is frustrating.

[JasonPratt]

Back on Russia's side, any deal from their perspective must include recovery of their own lost territory in the short term, but on the long term (whether Putin remains in power or not) they need some way of pulling out of their economic mismanagement nosedive -- in light of their demographic collapse which at this point is going to happen regardless of anything else.

Only massive immigration can stop the demographic collapse now. What conditions would inspire sufficient numbers of people to immigrate into Russian control of their lives, considering the government has been a kleptocracy gang in effect since the fall of the Soviet Union (and really for all the decades of the USSR, too)?

The only (relatively) peaceful answer I can see would be the removal of the kleptocracy and replacement by trustworthy management. Is that going to happen? All signs point to hell no.

So one way or another, Russia is going down, and whoever is in charge of the musical chairs at the top will want to make sure they're the ones with the golden parachutes when the music grinds to a halt (if I may mix the metaphors there). That's why they went after Ukraine, and anywhere else they could get back into their exploitation embrace. Even getting Ukraine wasn't going to solve the underlying problems, only kick the can down the road a while longer as the current leadership dies off (through y'know various means cough.)

Any negotiations with Russian leaders right now, which doesn't keep those factors firmly in mind, will be a disaster. But since those factors aren't realistically going away, there can be no 'successful' negotiations with Russia. There can only be (sort-of) successful negotiations with whoever is controlling Russia as to what they're personally willing to live with (and how, and where) as Russia is falling apart.

Taking Trump ideally at what he says (as a best-case scenario), he wants other nations to be as successful as possible as peacefully as possible -- even though he's going to put US interests first, he expects and respects other nations putting their own interests ahead of ours. That means he would want both Ukraine and Russia to be economically and culturally successful. But for Putin (at best, based on past behavior in light of current emphases), economic success is just something he and his cronies can loot as much and whenever they want. (This is completely aside from whatever Zel and his backers really want for/from Ukraine! But whatever that reality is, isn't irrelevant either! We have a good idea what the corruption of 'evil eastern Switzerland' was like before Zel & company took power; what does reform mean for them now? For that matter this is aside from what Trump & company really want compared to public statements thereof.)

This is why I don't see a real political fix being possible. The question is what will it take (if anything) to scare/bribe Putin & company into settling for less than they wanted to achieve, considering the underlying cynical nihilism of their strategy and goals anyway? -- because Russia itself cannot be fixed for a multi-generational time, or ever as long as people such as Putin remain in control.

...or, how to remove Putin & company from control with acceptable consequences and risks? Which isn't political negotiation but war vs Putin & company by whatever means.

[Tripoli]

Just to dovetail off of what Jarhead said: Trump has a history of saying "out of the box" things not because he believes them, but because he appears to be doing one or more of the following: 1) staking out negotiation positions: 2) getting sides to do something he wants them to do; 3) Psychologically throwing a side "off balance" ; 4) Manipulating public perception; 5) Other.  What he says is not necessarily what he wants.  IRT the Ukraine: I "think" Trump may be positioning Russia to end the war and to move Russia away from China, and (hopefully) to side with the West against the PRC.  I personally believe such a move is possible, and it would be in Russia's interest, as Siberia (and its resources) are undoubtably tempting to China (and were in some cases actually part of China until the 19th century).

[JudgeDredd]

Well said JH 

However, I'll take your pinch and upgrade it to a very large spoon 

I don't know about the moral standpoint of asking Ukraine to pay money back that wasn't part of the original deal. I clearly don't know what the deal was - I'm just saying if nothing was mentioned about repayment, then I just don't think it's right to do so now.

That's under the last administration.

If the new administration has a plan for repayment of monies given going forward - I would say that's fair and (like you not thinking about strategic implications) acceptable for the new administration to do such a thing.

I'm fine with the current stance on Europe as well. Europe have been asked to pay their fair share for defence for some time and not bothered their arse. I hope they get their act together - because without the US being the world police, Europe needs to look after it's own border and they should've recognised that without having to wait on the US to tell them so in such a manner.

Whatever happens - my own wish is Europe steps up to the mark, financially and militarily and Ukraine gets, at the absolute least, it's 2022 border back.

However - whatever deal is done should be down to the Ukrainians. Europe has to step up and back Ukraine so they know they can refuse any half baked, territory splitting deal being force on the Ukrainians.

I saw this today from the ex defence minister of the UK. Interesting.

[Crossroads]

That was some very good commentary by Ben Wallace, thanks for sharing it.