UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

[LadyTevar]

NEW THREAD DUE TO ONE YEAR OF WAR.

[bilateralrope]

Here's China's peace plan

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis
2023-02-24 09:00

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected. 

2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent.

3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one. All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control. All parties should support Russia and Ukraine in working in the same direction and resuming direct dialogue as quickly as possible, so as to gradually deescalate the situation and ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire. 

4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard. 

5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported. Humanitarian operations should follow the principles of neutrality and impartiality, and humanitarian issues should not be politicized. The safety of civilians must be effectively protected, and humanitarian corridors should be set up for the evacuation of civilians from conflict zones. Efforts are needed to increase humanitarian assistance to relevant areas, improve humanitarian conditions, and provide rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access, with a view to preventing a humanitarian crisis on a larger scale. The UN should be supported in playing a coordinating role in channeling humanitarian aid to conflict zones.

6. Protecting civilians and prisoners of war (POWs). Parties to the conflict should strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict, and respect the basic rights of POWs. China supports the exchange of POWs between Russia and Ukraine, and calls on all parties to create more favorable conditions for this purpose.

7. Keeping nuclear power plants safe. China opposes armed attacks against nuclear power plants or other peaceful nuclear facilities, and calls on all parties to comply with international law including the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) and resolutely avoid man-made nuclear accidents. China supports the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in playing a constructive role in promoting the safety and security of peaceful nuclear facilities.

8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided. China opposes the research, development and use of chemical and biological weapons by any country under any circumstances.

9. Facilitating grain exports. All parties need to implement the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed by Russia, Türkiye, Ukraine and the UN fully and effectively in a balanced manner, and support the UN in playing an important role in this regard. The cooperation initiative on global food security proposed by China provides a feasible solution to the global food crisis.

10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council. Relevant countries should stop abusing unilateral sanctions and “long-arm jurisdiction” against other countries, so as to do their share in deescalating the Ukraine crisis and create conditions for developing countries to grow their economies and better the lives of their people.

11. Keeping industrial and supply chains stable. All parties should earnestly maintain the existing world economic system and oppose using the world economy as a tool or weapon for political purposes. Joint efforts are needed to mitigate the spillovers of the crisis and prevent it from disrupting international cooperation in energy, finance, food trade and transportation and undermining the global economic recovery.

12. Promoting post-conflict reconstruction. The international community needs to take measures to support post-conflict reconstruction in conflict zones. China stands ready to provide assistance and play a constructive role in this endeavor.

Russia clearly disagrees with 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 8. Possibly others. The only way I can see this going anywhere is if China is working behind the scenes to convince Russia to pull out of Ukraine. The other possibilities are:
- China is trying to make everyone perceive them as helping when Russia pulls out.
- China is positioning itself to profit from the reconstruction.

[LadyTevar]

HAS PUTIN'S WAR FAILED?

When Vladimir Putin sent up to 200,000 soldiers into Ukraine on 24 February 2022, he wrongly assumed he could sweep into the capital, Kyiv, in a matter of days and depose the government.

After a series of humiliating retreats, his initial invasion plan has clearly failed, but Russia's war is far from over.

Why did Putin invade?
Even now, Russia's leader describes the biggest European invasion since the end of World War Two as a "special military operation". Not the full-scale war that has bombed civilians across Ukraine and left more than 13 million either as refugees abroad or displaced inside their own country.

His declared goal on 24 February 2022 was to "demilitarise and denazify" Ukraine and not occupy it by force, days after backing independence for eastern Ukrainian territories occupied by Russian proxy forces since 2014.

He vowed to protect people from eight years of Ukrainian bullying and genocide - a Russian propaganda claim with no foundation in reality. He spoke of preventing Nato from gaining a foothold in Ukraine, then added another objective of ensuring Ukraine's neutral status.

President Putin never said it out loud, but high on the agenda was toppling the government of Ukraine's elected president. "The enemy has designated me as target number one; my family is target number two," said Volodymyr Zelensky. Russian troops made two attempts to storm the presidential compound, according to his adviser.

Russian claims of Ukrainian Nazis committing genocide never added up, but Russian state-run news agency Ria Novosti explained that "denazification is inevitably also de-Ukrainisation" - in effect, erasing the modern state of Ukraine.

For years, the Russian president has denied Ukraine its own statehood, writing in a lengthy 2021 essay that "Russians and Ukrainians were one people" dating back to the late 9th Century.

How Putin changed his war aims
A month into the invasion and his campaign goals were dramatically scaled back after a retreat from Kyiv and Chernihiv. The main goal became the "liberation of Donbas" - broadly referring to Ukraine's two industrial regions in the east of Luhansk and Donetsk.

Forced into further retreats from Kharkiv in the north-east and Kherson in the south, that aim remains unchanged, but it has shown little success in achieving it.

Those reverses on the battlefield rushed Russia's leader into annexing four Ukrainian provinces last September, without having full control of any of them: neither Luhansk or Donetsk in the east, nor Kherson or Zaporizhzhia to the south.

To bolster his depleted forces President Putin announced Russia's first mobilisation since World War Two, although it was partial and limited to some 300,000 reservists.

A war of attrition is now taking place along an active front line of 850km (530 miles) and Russian victories are small and rare. What was meant to be a quick operation is now a protracted war that Western leaders are determined Ukraine should win. Any realistic prospect of neutrality for Ukraine is long gone.

President Putin warned in December that the war "could be a lengthy process", but then added later that Russia's goal was "not to spin the flywheel of military conflict", but to end it. There is little hope of that on the horizon.

A year into the war, he talks of Russia fighting to defend its "historical frontiers" and "rebuilding peaceful life in Donbas and Novorossiya", spelling out that Ukraine's southern territories are part of his project, just as much as the east.

What gains has Russia made?
The biggest success President Putin can lay claim to is establishing a land bridge from Russia's border to Crimea, annexed illegally in 2014, so it is no longer reliant on its bridge over the Kerch Strait.

He has spoken of the capture of this territory, which includes the cities of Mariupol and Melitopol, as a "significant result for Russia". The Sea of Azov, inside the Kerch Strait, "has become Russia's internal sea", he declared, pointing out that even Russian Tsar Peter the Great did not manage that.

Is Russia losing the war?
Beyond seizing a territorial corridor to Crimea, Russia's bloody, unprovoked war has been a disaster for itself and the country it was unleashed on. So far, it has achieved little more than exposing the brutality and inadequacy of the Russian military.

While cities such as Mariupol were flattened, details of war crimes have emerged against civilians in Bucha, near Kyiv, and have led to an independent report that accused Russia itself of state-orchestrated incitement to genocide.

But it is the military failures that have shown Russia at its weakest:

* The retreat of 30,000 Russian troops across the Dnipro river from Kherson in November was a strategic failure
* A 56km (35-mile) armoured convoy that ground to a halt near Kyiv at the start of the war was a logistical failure
* The deaths of a large number of recently mobilised troops in a Ukrainian new-year missile attack on Makiivka were an intelligence failure
* The sinking of the flagship Black Sea battle cruiser the Moskva was a defensive failure, as was the spectacular attack in October 2022 that shut the Kerch Strait bridge for weeks.
* Russia's warnings to the West against arming Ukraine have gone unheeded, with Western assurances of support "for as long as it takes" and pledges that Nato will never be divided.

Superior US Himars missiles helped turn the course of the war and German Leopard 2 tanks are promised, even if Western fighter jets are not. A succession of Western leaders, including President Joe Biden, have made the complex journey to Kyiv.

But this war is not over. The fight for Donbas continues. Russia has captured the town of Soledar this year and has hopes of seizing the eastern city of Bakhmut on the road to key cities to the west, and of recapturing territory it lost last autumn.

Putin watchers believe he will seek to extend control of the four regions that he has declared to be part of Russia, not just in Donbas, but towards the key city of Zaporizhzhia.

Should he need to, President Putin could extend mobilisation and drag out the war. Russia is a nuclear power and he has indicated he would be prepared, if necessary, to use nuclear weapons to protect Russia and cling on to occupied Ukrainian land. "We will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff," he warned.

Kyiv believes Russia is also seeking to depose the pro-European government in Moldova, where Russian troops are based in the breakaway region of Transnistria bordering Ukraine.

Can we say how many Russians have died?
Neither Russia nor Ukraine give details of their own losses, so reliable numbers are extremely difficult. But Russians losses have been especially heavy in recent weeks, with several hundred deaths every day on the battlefields of the east.

BBC Russian has identified more than 15,000 Russian soldiers killed in the first year of war and suggests the most conservative estimate would be at least double that, with more than 100,000 others wounded or missing.

UK defence intelligence believes Russian casualties increased significantly after partial mobilisation, reaching 175-200,000 in total, of whom 40-60,000 were killed.

Ukraine revealed at the end of 2022 that 10-13,000 of its soldiers had been killed since the start of the war. That figure cannot be confirmed, but it followed a US estimate of some 100,000 Ukrainians killed or wounded by November. Before Western artillery arrived in the east last summer, Kyiv officials said 100 to 200 troops were dying every day.

The UN human rights commissioner says at least 8,006 civilians have died and 13,287 have been wounded in 12 months of war, but the true number is likely to be substantially higher.

Has Putin been damaged?
President Putin, 70, has sought to distance himself from military failures, but his authority, at least outside Russia, has been shredded and he makes few trips beyond its borders.

At home, Russia's economy on the surface appears to have weathered a series of Western sanctions for now, although its budget deficit has soared and oil and gas revenue has fallen dramatically.

Any attempt to gauge his popularity is fraught with difficulty.

Dissent in Russia is highly risky, with jail sentences handed out for anyone spreading "fake news" about the Russian military. Those opposing Russia's leadership have either fled or, as with main opposition figure Alexei Navalny, been thrown into prison.

Ukraine's shift to the West
The seeds of this war were sown in 2013, when Moscow persuaded Ukraine's pro-Russian leader to scrap a planned pact with the European Union, prompting protests that ultimately brought him down and led to Russia seizing Crimea and staging a land-grab in the east.

Four months into Russia's 2022 invasion, the EU granted Ukraine candidate status and Kyiv is pushing to be accepted as soon as it can.

Russia's long-time leader was also desperate to prevent Ukraine from entering Nato's orbit, but his attempt to blame the Western defensive alliance for the war is false.

Not only did Ukraine reportedly agree before the war a provisional deal with Russia to stay out of Nato but, in March, President Zelensky offered to maintain Ukraine as a non-aligned, non-nuclear state: "It's a truth and it must be recognised."

How will the war end?
No end is currently in sight.
Ukraine's position is that Russian troops must pull back beyond Ukraine's internationally recognised borders for there to be peace. It is backed by two UN resolutions, passed days after the invasion and hours before the first anniversary of the war.

By annexing four regions Russia does not even fully control, Vladimir Putin has made it very hard for himself to give them up.

There is little prospect for now of a ceasefire or peace talks. Turkey had some success last summer with the UN in mediating a deal on resuming grain exports through the Black Sea but has had no success since. China is looking for a role in securing a political settlement, but its position is probably too close to Russia to be considered an honest broker.

Was NATO to blame for the war?
NATO member states have increasingly sent Ukraine air defence systems to protect its cities, as well as missile systems, artillery and drones that helped turn the tide against Russia's invasion.

But it is not to blame for the war and has no troops on the ground. NATO's expansion comes as a response to the Russian threat - Sweden and Finland only applied to join because of the invasion.

Blaming NATO's expansion eastwards is a Russian narrative that has gained some ground in Europe. Before the war, President Putin demanded Nato turn the clock back to 1997 and remove its forces and military infrastructure from Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Baltics.

In his eyes, the West promised back in 1990 that NATO would expand "not an inch to the east", yet did so anyway. That was before the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, so the promise made to then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev referred merely to East Germany in the context of a reunified Germany.

Mr Gorbachev said later that "the topic of Nato expansion was never discussed" at the time.

NATO maintains it never intended to deploy combat troops on its eastern flank, until Russia annexed Crimea illegally in 2014.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

UN calls for immediate Russian withdrawal from Ukraine

The UN has overwhelmingly voted to call for Russia to immediately and unconditionally withdraw from Ukraine, marking one year since Moscow’s invasion by calling for a “comprehensive, just and lasting peace”.

Applause broke out when the result was announced, with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, calling the resolution “a powerful signal of unflagging global support for Ukraine” in a tweet late on Thursday.

The resolution on Thursday night saw 141 countries in favour with seven against and 32 abstentions, including China.

Russia had worked hard to try to end its isolation by blaming the west for pouring arms into the region and by pointing to the growing hunger crisis it blamed on western sanctions.

But Ukraine’s allies for their part had tried to maximise consultations, and in the resolution put a heavy emphasis on the willingness of Ukraine to seek dialogue. Ukraine was also persuaded to remove planned references to taking the Russian leadership to a special tribunal for committing war crimes. Several speakers said such a move would only make the search for peace more elusive. However, Ukraine’s allies failed to improve on numbers seen in the last vote on the issue in October immediately after Russia annexed republics in the east of Ukraine. In that vote 143 countries backed the resolution, with five against and 35 abstentions.

Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, said: “By voting in favour of today’s UN general assembly resolution 141 UN member states made it clear that Russia must end its illegal aggression. Ukraine’s territorial integrity must be restored. One year after Russia launched its full-scale invasion global support for Ukraine remains strong.”

The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, said as the assembly came to a close: “The UN general assembly has spoken very clearly. This vote shows that the international community stands with Ukraine.”

Among the big countries abstaining on Thursday, Thailand said it did not want to become involved in a morality play, adding that billions of bystanders were bearing the brunt of the war.

South Africa stressed that the principles of territorial integrity in the UN Charter were sacrosanct, and applied in the case of Ukraine, but claimed the resolution would not advance the cause of peace.

The Chinese deputy envoy to the UN, Dai Bing, said the west was throwing fuel on to the fire by arming Ukraine. That would only exacerbate tensions, he said.

Leading the abstention camp, he claimed: “One year into the Ukraine crisis, the conflict is still grinding on and growing in scale, wreaking havoc to countless lives. A spillover effect is intensifying. We are deeply worried about this. China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be respected. The purposes and principles of the UN Charter should be observed. The legitimate security concerns of all countries should be taken seriously.”

His remarks provoked a powerful rebuttal from Annalena Baerbock, the German foreign minister, rejecting his claim that the west was indulging in military spending at the expense of other priorities more important to ordinary people. She said it was specious to claim the military aid was worsening the crisis since if the west did not supply aid, the aggressor would be free to capture Ukraine and destroy the UN Charter.

Because the UN Security Council, which is charged with maintaining international peace and security, is paralysed by Russia’s veto power, the General Assembly has become the most important UN body dealing with Ukraine. Though General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding – unlike Security Council resolutions – they serve as a useful barometer of world opinion.

Catherine Colonna, the French foreign minister – one of many European foreign ministers to travel to New York for the debate prior to the vote – warned that those that abstained would in fact be siding with the aggressor.

She said none could sleep easy in a world in which a great power – one with nuclear weapons and a permanent Security Council member – could, at its own discretion, decide to attack its neighbours.

“Russia is trying to convince some of you that its attempts to upset the world order and impose a strength-based order will work in their favour. This is an illusion. The facts bear this out. It was Russia and Russia alone that wanted the war.”

[Ralin]

The only way I can see this going anywhere is if China is working behind the scenes to convince Russia to pull out of Ukraine. The other possibilities are:
- China is trying to make everyone perceive them as helping when Russia pulls out.
- China is positioning itself to profit from the reconstruction.

- The national government of China greatly wants this war to go away and stop making the world in general a shittier place but isn't willing to openly break with a major ally and certainly their strongest military ally.

[Solauren]

China might be willing to break with Russia at a later date, as Russia deteriorates more.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... ons-russia

Polish Leopard tanks arrive in Ukraine as west piles new sanctions on Russia

Poland’s PM visits Kyiv as allies demonstrate support on first anniversary of invasion
Jennifer Rankin in Brussels and Julian Borger

Fri 24 Feb 2023 21.32 GMT

The first Polish Leopard tanks have arrived in Ukraine, as western allies including the G7 and EU announced a range of further economic, military and financial sanctions against Russia, in a renewed effort to weaken Vladimir Putin’s war machine.

Speaking on the first anniversary of the Russian invasion, Poland’s prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, confirmed that four Leopard tanks had been delivered to Ukraine. “Poland and Europe stand by your side. We will definitely not leave you, we will support Ukraine until complete victory over Russia,” he said, standing alongside the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, during his visit to Kyiv.

As ceremonies to remember the dead took place in Kyiv, western allies sought to demonstrate their support. Ukraine’s blue and yellow colours were projected on the Eiffel Tower, the Brandenburg Gate, the Empire State Building and EU headquarters, and were painted on the street by activists outside the Russian embassy in London.

On Friday evening the G7 announced it was determined to strengthen sanctions and take unprecedented measures in order to weaken Russia, promising measures against Russian diamond exports, a controversial issue for Europe. It warned that third countries that help Russia evade sanctions would face “severe costs” and is understood to be setting up an “enforcement coordination mechanism” to stop evasion of G7 sanctions already imposed.

In a joint statement, G7 leaders said: “We call on third-countries or other international actors who seek to evade or undermine our measures to cease providing material support to Russia’s war, or face severe costs.”

Ahead of the G7 meeting, the US led the way with an announcement of further military aid for Ukraine and sanctions against Russia and its supporters, including Chinese companies.

The military assistance package will include several new drone and anti-drone systems the US has not previously made available, as well as equipment to help Ukraine counter Russian electronic warfare. The new drones include the Switchblade 600, a bigger version of the loitering munition (or kamikaze drone) than has already been supplied, as well as the CyberLux K8, Altius-600, and the Jump 20, which can be used for surveillance or adapted to carry bombs.

The US will also send more ammunition for the high mobility artillery rocket systems (Himars) and 155mm howitzer guns Washington has provided over the course of the year.

The US commerce department will list more than 80 companies from Russia, China and other countries accused of sanctions busting, including “backfill activities in support of Russia’s defence sector”, replenishing material that Moscow has used up in the invasion. The Biden administration has become increasingly vocal about Chinese aid to the Russian war machine, and has raised concerns recently that Beijing is contemplating supplying weapons directly. The companies named would be blocked from purchasing hi-tech items such as semiconductors made in the US, or using US technology abroad.

Tariffs will be raised on imports from Russia of more than 100 metals, minerals and chemical products, including aluminium smelt or cast in Russia, worth an estimated $2.8bn (£2.3bn) in revenue to Moscow.

Unveiling its latest sanctions, the UK said it was banning the export of every item Russia has been found using on the battlefield to date, a list covering hundreds of goods, including aircraft parts, radio equipment and electronic components.

The British government is also imposing sanctions on senior executives at Russia’s state-owned nuclear power company Rosatom, who Ukraine says are complicit in the seizure and forced nationality change of staff at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and their children.

UK sanctions also target 34 top officials from Russia’s two largest defence companies, Rostec and Almaz-Antey, and four banks.

The head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said sanctions were working. “Russia is falling backwards towards an autarkic economy cut away from the world. Our sanctions are eroding sharply its economic base, slashing any prospect to modernise it,” she said in Tallinn, where she attended ceremonies to mark Estonia’s independence day.

The EU agreed late on Friday to ban on exports of critical technologies to Russia, as part of a 10th round of sanctions. Despite plans to have the measures in place by the first anniversary of the invasion, the measures were held up by a last-minute dispute over how quickly to ban synthetic rubber imports from Russia.

Italy objected to a rapid phase-out, while Poland blindsided other member states with its insistence the trade be stopped as soon as possible. EU diplomats voiced frustration that Poland, one of the bloc’s most hawkish voices on sanctions, was prepared to hold up a deal over a relatively minor issue.

Some sources attributed Warsaw’s position to hopes of gaining ground for its domestic rubber industry. “Poland is basically stopping this whole package on 24 February to carve out some putative advantage for the Polish rubber industry,” said one diplomat.

Morawiecki had said earlier the package was “too soft, too weak” and called on allies to adopt a tougher position. Poland eventually climbed down on an immediate ban; a Polish diplomat said they accepted a deal on six conditions, including launching work to sanction 150 Russian propagandists and a review clause on rubber imports. Talks between the 27 member states this week also became bogged down over a proposal to fine European companies and individuals if they failed to report on the location of Russian state assets. That idea was dropped as member states said they needed more time to study the idea.

The latest EU package will ban the export of components for drones and helicopters, as well as spare parts for vehicles, items that were found on the battlefields of Ukraine and were missed off previous sanctions lists.

Western countries are increasingly concerned about Russia’s ability to dodge sanctions by sourcing technology from front companies or friendly exporters in neighbouring countries.

EU and UK exports to Armenia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, all members of the Eurasian Customs Union with Russia and Belarus, jumped by between 15% and 90% following the invasion of Ukraine, according to a paper by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development released on Friday. The increase was particularly marked for sanctioned goods no longer available to Russia, and showed “a pattern suggestive of new supply chains”, the authors said.

Western officials have also noted with concern the growth in Russian trade with the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and China.

Officials are now studying how to prevent sanctions dodging, via a mix of persuasion or threats to cut market access.

Meanwhile, the US has this week begun disbursing $9.9bn in financial assistance to help fund healthcare, education and emergency services in Ukraine, while the G7 as a whole has increased its commitment of budget and economic support to $39bn for this year. Part of the US assistance will be a third delivery by the energy department of equipment to help patch the Ukrainian power grid equipment which has been weakened by repeated Russian missile attacks over the course of the year.

The first tanks are arriving, and the sanctions are getting tougher.

[Highlord Laan]

The only way I can see this going anywhere is if China is working behind the scenes to convince Russia to pull out of Ukraine. The other possibilities are:
- China is trying to make everyone perceive them as helping when Russia pulls out.
- China is positioning itself to profit from the reconstruction.

- The national government of China greatly wants this war to go away and stop making the world in general a shittier place but isn't willing to openly break with a major ally and certainly their strongest military ally.

If ruzzia is China's most powerful military ally, they're already in trouble.

[Ralin]

China might be willing to break with Russia at a later date, as Russia deteriorates more.

More like Russia will become the clearly junior partner in their relationship.

[Dark Hellion]

The only way I can see this going anywhere is if China is working behind the scenes to convince Russia to pull out of Ukraine. The other possibilities are:
- China is trying to make everyone perceive them as helping when Russia pulls out.
- China is positioning itself to profit from the reconstruction.

- The national government of China greatly wants this war to go away and stop making the world in general a shittier place but isn't willing to openly break with a major ally and certainly their strongest military ally.

If ruzzia is China's most powerful military ally, they're already in trouble.

May be why scuttlebutt is China has pushed back any Taiwan plans half a decade... China kinda ended up showing up to a wedding only to find the best man passed out drunk without his pants on. Which does make for the deliciousness of Biden's bumblefucking old man gaffe machine absolutely annihilating Xi's faux realpolitik.

[bilateralrope]

China might be willing to break with Russia at a later date, as Russia deteriorates more.

More like Russia will become the clearly junior partner in their relationship.

That might give China enough influence to end the war.


One thing that worries me about Russia collapsing into civil war is their nukes. Who gets control of them ?

[Broomstick]

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis
2023-02-24 09:00

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries.

...>cough<...  It's a bit... off coming from China. Admittedly, all nations are problematic at best about this notion but to name just Taiwan and Tibet the Chinese look a tad hypocritical here.

2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs.

In other words, stop expanding NATO. You know, NATO wouldn't have expanded in the first place if there wasn't a perceived threat, and it wouldn't have started expanding again this year if there hadn't been an actual threat in the form of an invasion of Ukraine.

Absent something more effective, "expanding military blocs" is an effective means of smaller/poorer nations to protect themselves. Until we get actual effective international policy this leaves smaller countries more vulnerable to rule-breaking big ones.

3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one.

Incorrect. Conflict and war benefit various parties who profit from supplying arms and other military supplies. It also benefits any party that can actually acquire territory and resources and hold onto them. It's a pernicious myth that war benefits no one.

All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control.

Well, damn, if we could just do that we wouldn't have this "war" problem!

4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis.

That only works if BOTH parties take the concept seriously. The Russians have not, largely because they are interested in owning Ukraine and do not at present feel a need to compromise. Until they do talking will accomplish nothing.

5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported.

I can get behind that.

Xi, tell your friend Putin to stop bombing fleeing civilians, stop destroying hospitals, killing medical personnel, and so forth. Because the vast majority humanitarians catastrophes in Ukraine these days are of Russian making.

6. Protecting civilians and prisoners of war (POWs).[/b] Parties to the conflict should strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict, and respect the basic rights of POWs. China supports the exchange of POWs between Russia and Ukraine, and calls on all parties to create more favorable conditions for this purpose.

Again, it's one side of this conflict causing the problem here.

7. Keeping nuclear power plants safe. China opposes armed attacks against nuclear power plants or other peaceful nuclear facilities, and calls on all parties to comply with international law including the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) and resolutely avoid man-made nuclear accidents.

We can all get behind that. And you'd think, what with Chernobyl on their territory the Ukrainians are also 100% behind this, but again, the Ukrainians don't seem to be the problem here. It was the Russians that took over Chernobyl, disrupted operations there, and had their guys digging and camping in trenches in the Red Forest.

Again, Xi, use your influence with your buddy Putin to do something about this. Your posturing as a third party mediator would carry a lot more credibility if you could make some actual progress on this sort of thing.

8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided.

Since the Ukrainians don't own any nukes this is clearly, again, referring to the Russians here. Xi, use your connections to do something here, otherwise it's just more hot air (hmm.... perhaps we have found the source of lifting gas for that Chinese spy balloon over the US....?)

9. Facilitating grain exports. All parties need to implement the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed by Russia, Türkiye, Ukraine and the UN fully and effectively in a balanced manner, and support the UN in playing an important role in this regard. The cooperation initiative on global food security proposed by China provides a feasible solution to the global food crisis.

I have not read this "cooperation initiative on global food security" but would be interested in doing so. Anyone have a link? I can get behind this - but, once again, I'd tell Xi to use his influence to get Russia to stop impeding food exports because the reality is they're the ones causing the problem here.

10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council.

If sanctions can only be approved by the security council then it effectively means no member of said council will ever be sanctioned again. Which, with China being a member, would suit China just perfectly. The most powerful nations in the world would be immune, and I don't think that's a good idea. Sanctions are far from perfect and often ineffective but they're one of the few mechanisms outside of war or terrorism for nations to oppose each other.

11. Keeping industrial and supply chains stable. All parties should earnestly maintain the existing world economic system and oppose using the world economy as a tool or weapon for political purposes.

In other words, China is saying please don't disrupt our gravy train, we need the money.

We don't need the current supply chains, we need better ones that won't be so seriously disrupted by a pandemic or by one nation attempting to exert influence over another.

12. Promoting post-conflict reconstruction. The international community needs to take measures to support post-conflict reconstruction in conflict zones. China stands ready to provide assistance and play a constructive role in this endeavor.

In other words, China wants to further integrate itself into other nations and money, money, money. Which is not to deny other nations wanting to do the same. Rebuilding a nation without insertion of corruption and foreign influence is yet to be done.

- China is positioning itself to profit from the reconstruction.

Absolutely.

[Broomstick]

One thing that worries me about Russia collapsing into civil war is their nukes. Who gets control of them ?

Good question. That one worries absolutely everyone.

Problem is, absolutely no one knows the answer.

I think most folks don't want to think about it, but it's entirely conceivable that in a Russian civil war various factions could wind up nuking each other. I very, very much hope that is extremely unlikely, but if it did there are sufficient nukes in the Russian arsenal that, even if nothing outside Russia is hit, the knock-on effects could make life miserable for everyone else for years.

[Korto]

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis
2023-02-24 09:00

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries.

...>cough<...  It's a bit... off coming from China. Admittedly, all nations are problematic at best about this notion but to name just Taiwan and Tibet the Chinese look a tad hypocritical here.

Taiwan's a bit meh, since China does have a legitimate claim to it being a rebel province.
I would wonder where China's wonderful sovereignty ideals have been since 2014, however.

2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs.

In other words, stop expanding NATO. You know, NATO wouldn't have expanded in the first place if there wasn't a perceived threat, and it wouldn't have started expanding again this year if there hadn't been an actual threat in the form of an invasion of Ukraine.

As a country with obvious ambitions to become the newest superpower, suggesting that small countries shouldn't band together for protection is self-serving rubbish.

5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported.

I can get behind that.

All measures? More information required, or this is a blank cheque.

8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided.

Since the Ukrainians don't own any nukes this is clearly, again, referring to the Russians here. Xi, use your connections to do something here, otherwise it's just more hot air (hmm.... perhaps we have found the source of lifting gas for that Chinese spy balloon over the US....?)

To be fair, considering China apparently has a treaty with Ukraine promising to defend them in case of nuclear attack, I suspect he has been on the private line a few times to Putin telling him just how little China wants to have to choose between rendering their word worthless or engagng in nuclear war.

10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council.

If sanctions can only be approved by the security council then it effectively means no member of said council will ever be sanctioned again. Which, with China being a member, would suit China just perfectly. The most powerful nations in the world would be immune, and I don't think that's a good idea. Sanctions are far from perfect and often ineffective but they're one of the few mechanisms outside of war or terrorism for nations to oppose each other.

I'm sure that little detail never occured to China. They would be shocked if you pointed it out! Shocked, I say!


So, a mix of vague motherhood statements (while ignoring the elephant in the room by not mentioning anywhere that there is one very clear aggressor), and some self-servng crap.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

It's a load of meaningless waffle, but it's not unexpected. China reacted in pretty much the same way to the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan not so long ago. Say nice-sounding things, but don't actually do anything.

[Lord Revan]

One thing that worries me about Russia collapsing into civil war is their nukes. Who gets control of them ?

Good question. That one worries absolutely everyone.

Problem is, absolutely no one knows the answer.

I think most folks don't want to think about it, but it's entirely conceivable that in a Russian civil war various factions could wind up nuking each other. I very, very much hope that is extremely unlikely, but if it did there are sufficient nukes in the Russian arsenal that, even if nothing outside Russia is hit, the knock-on effects could make life miserable for everyone else for years.

I think it's even they then "absolutely no one knows the answer" as the answer is pretty simple, it's "who ever controls the area where the nukes are located" the problem there is that said answer is extremely vague and there's no real way of making it any less vague.

As I mentioned in the other thread there's a major risk that in case of a civil war the factions will either try to nuke each others or threaten to nuke other countries unless they give them supplies to fight with. This is true if any nuclear power were to devolve into a civil war.

That why I consider a Russian civil war very much a worst case scenario, not the only but very much in that category.

[bilateralrope]

I think it's even they then "absolutely no one knows the answer" as the answer is pretty simple, it's "who ever controls the area where the nukes are located" the problem there is that said answer is extremely vague and there's no real way of making it any less vague.

Two problems there. The first is that we don't know who that will be.

The second involves questions around the launch procedures. Can they be launched remotely ?

How easy is it to launch them if the only access someone has is physical access to the nuke ?

What does someone with physical access need to do to prevent remote launches ?
If they have to cause expensive to repair damage to the nuke, that's a good thing. If they can get by with easy to repair damage to the comms system, then they can repair that damage if it's ever convenient for them to do so.

[wautd]

The fact that not a single Ukrainian official was at that table shows that China's peace plan wasn't serious to begin with. A cease fire while Russia occupies 20-25% of Ukraine would just be used by Putin to dig in and restrengthen his military

[bilateralrope]

Good question. That one worries absolutely everyone.

Problem is, absolutely no one knows the answer.

I think most folks don't want to think about it, but it's entirely conceivable that in a Russian civil war various factions could wind up nuking each other. I very, very much hope that is extremely unlikely, but if it did there are sufficient nukes in the Russian arsenal that, even if nothing outside Russia is hit, the knock-on effects could make life miserable for everyone else for years.

The safe answer seems to be to try and prevent a civil war occurring. Or, if it's going to happen, try to make it a quick coup to limit the spread of violence.

[Ralin]

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis
2023-02-24 09:00

Snip

It's accurate to say this statement and others before it boil down to vague expressions of a desire for everyone to do good stuff and don't offer any meaningful advice to improve the situation. That said, it's worth pointing out that 1) China doesn't reliably benefit from this war being a thing and dragging on and 2) we don't know what Xi Jinping has said to Putin privately peer to peer.

The Chinese government probably could do more to try and encourage Putin to end the war, like threatening to cooperate with sanctions and embargos, but I'm guessing Xi Jinping et al also recognize that if they go down that route they're very quickly going to stop being allies with a more or less friendly business relationship. And Russia is an important strategic partner for them.

[Lord Revan]

I think it's even they then "absolutely no one knows the answer" as the answer is pretty simple, it's "who ever controls the area where the nukes are located" the problem there is that said answer is extremely vague and there's no real way of making it any less vague.

Two problems there. The first is that we don't know who that will be.

The second involves questions around the launch procedures. Can they be launched remotely ?

How easy is it to launch them if the only access someone has is physical access to the nuke ?

What does someone with physical access need to do to prevent remote launches ?
If they have to cause expensive to repair damage to the nuke, that's a good thing. If they can get by with easy to repair damage to the comms system, then they can repair that damage if it's ever convenient for them to do so.

Yes I know that we don't know who that will be, that was the whole point about calling the answer extremely vague.

As for remote launches, I dunno how it is for Russia but isn't it so that all US nukes can only be launched locally, you can remotely tell the forces present to launch but the actual launch command to the missiles can only be executed locally. With the "Nuclear Football" being more a way for the president to know how to give a valid launch order then a "launch all" button.

[Broomstick]

I think it's even they then "absolutely no one knows the answer" as the answer is pretty simple, it's "who ever controls the area where the nukes are located" the problem there is that said answer is extremely vague and there's no real way of making it any less vague.

I am of course not privy to how the USSR and now Russia distributes the nukes, but if it's anything like how the US has done it (and that's just the public information) they will be located over a lot of territory, making the prospect of multiple factions acquiring some quite likely.

[Broomstick]

As for remote launches, I dunno how it is for Russia but isn't it so that all US nukes can only be launched locally, you can remotely tell the forces present to launch but the actual launch command to the missiles can only be executed locally. With the "Nuclear Football" being more a way for the president to know how to give a valid launch order then a "launch all" button.

Probably won't shock anyone to state that our knowledge of how the US nuke system operates is quite limited, as most of it is secret. But yes, what public information exists indicates that the actual people who launch them are located in very close physical proximity to the actual weapons and it's carefully secured communication methods that communicate the launch order from the PotUS or perhaps other authorized people if the PotUS is taken out of the picture.

[Lord Revan]

I think it's even they then "absolutely no one knows the answer" as the answer is pretty simple, it's "who ever controls the area where the nukes are located" the problem there is that said answer is extremely vague and there's no real way of making it any less vague.

I am of course not privy to how the USSR and now Russia distributes the nukes, but if it's anything like how the US has done it (and that's just the public information) they will be located over a lot of territory, making the prospect of multiple factions acquiring some quite likely.

From what I've heard/read a majority of Russian nukes are in the Kola region. Essentially it's why Finland is so valuable to NATO as if NATO has access to Finland they could cut a good chunk of the Russian nukes out of the picture, though obviously not truck or sub mounted missiles.

[LaCroix]

Ukraine came through with their announcement of a big anniversary surprise today.

6 major ammo supply depots that funnel the entirety of the Donetsk and zaphorizia region supply were hit and pretty much annihilated.

Due to the way Russian supply planning works, this means that the region's forces will have to make do with what they have until the next month or so, because their monthly allowance just went up in flames.

As they were alredy being starved for ammo, they will be pretty much out. Which means that they either have to stopp their 'offensive' (big chance), or will revert to massed infantry charges.

Those have been proven at least temporarily successful - in the north of Bakhmut, a few villages were seized, but not without a huge toll in men and material. In each case, the defenders retreated when the push became too much to hold back, and then took out the attackers with artillery as they milled around with no further orders(and supplies spent).

So far, trading ground for casualties still works, and as reported, the first western arms shipments are arriving, so we might see a counter offensive, soon.

Especially the massed Donetsk supply suppression might be a sign that things are on the horizon.

Another detail - Mariupol is technically out of range for himars... Unless the UA forces drove one directly up to the.frontline to fire, they must have used something with more range than a GMLRS missile. Roports from russian defenders also indicate that this was a different weapon than normal himars (probably due to the flight profile - a gliding bomb would have a very different approach compared to a ballistic missile)