Ukraine outrage and analysis.

[Chip]

Putin goes full batshit in paranoid rant.

Putin’s annexation speech: more angry taxi driver than head of state

Shaun Walker
Fri 30 Sep 2022

Eight-and-a-half years after Vladimir Putin announced the annexation of Crimea, he gathered the elites of Russia in the Kremlin’s St George Hall for another land-grab ceremony: this time laying claim to four more Ukrainian regions.

The annexation formalities were preceded by an angry, rambling speech that dwelled only briefly on either Ukraine or the four regions of which Russia now claims ownership. Instead, Putin railed at the west for a litany of sins, ranging from destabilising Russia in the 17th century to allowing gender reassignment surgery. He also reiterated his threat to use nuclear weapons, claiming the US had “created a precedent” for the use of nuclear force in 1945.

Friday’s speech is likely to go down as another milestone in Putin’s long reign over Russia. And while it was the same hall, the same crowd and the same message as the Crimea annexation in March 2014, the context is very different.

Then, Putin carried much of Russia’s elite and society with him, on a wave of patriotic fervour boosted by state television propaganda. Outside Russia, while many were shocked at the naked land grab, others felt Putin had a point: after Iraq and Libya, how could the west lecture others on violating sovereignty? Many European politicians wanted to get back to business as usual with Russia as quickly as possible.

This time, the domestic and international situations are far less favourable for Putin. At home, he has embarked on an unpopular mobilisation drive, prompting hundreds of thousands of Russians to try to leave the country. The improvements in quality of life that the first years of Putinism brought are drying up amid sanctions and international isolation. Since February, the Russian leader has become an international outcast, with even non-western leaders rebuking his blatant aggression in Ukraine, undermining his claims on Friday to speak for the whole non-western world.

In 2014, he railed at the hypocrisy of western politicians who “call something white today and black tomorrow”, and many nodded along. Today, he offered an angrier but less coherent denunciation of the west, more angry taxi driver than head of state. “They don’t want us to be free, they want us to be a colony; they don’t want equal partnership, they want to steal from us,” he said.

Putin veered from denouncing the “totalitarianism, despotism and apartheid” of today’s west, to bringing up the historical pillaging of India, the bombing of Dresden at the end of the second world war and the “many genders” in fashion in the west. Russia’s mission, he said, was to “defend our children from monstrous experiments designed to destroy their consciousness and their souls”.

Andrei Kolesnikov, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on Twitter: “Putin’s speech is a set of unbelievably illiterate conspiracy cliches that 30 years ago could be read in marginal national-patriotic newspapers. Now it has become the policy of the former superpower, which even in the days of the Soviet leaders could not afford such a discourse.”

On Ukraine, Putin said Russia was “ready for negotiations”, but immediately followed this with an insistence that the annexed territories would be part of Russia “forever” and could not be part of any talks.

Ukraine has already said it will ignore the annexations and continue its military campaign to regain territory. Kyiv believes any “ceasefire” would simply give Russia time to regroup before a renewed assault.

After all, in his March 2014 speech, Putin explicitly ruled out seizing more territory: “Don’t believe those who try to frighten you with Russia and who scream that other regions will follow after Crimea … We do not need this.” And yet, here they were, back in the St George Hall, applauding as four more Moscow-appointed puppet leaders signed over their regions to Moscow.

But annexation involves more than pieces of paper, and while in 2014 Russia had just carried out a swift and stealthy military operation to seize Crimea, this time things are far less clear-cut. Fighting continues in and around all four of the regions Russia is claiming, prompting the mobilisation order.

Putin’s speech left unanswered almost all the key questions about what might happen next. His spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, could not say on Friday morning whether Russia was claiming all of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, or only the parts of them it already controls, promising to “clarify” this later. The speech left us none the wiser. Friday’s audience, predominantly older men with security and military backgrounds, grimly applauded their leader. But many in the Russian political elite are aghast at the events of the past few months, even if they have not made their criticisms public. They also remain in the dark about how events might develop.

“Nobody knows what happens next, it’s clear there is no grand strategy,” said one Moscow source, a well-connected political insider. “If one thing doesn’t work, we will try something else, and nobody knows where it will lead. Decisions are taken in the head of one man.” While Putin has talked for two decades about the west’s desire to destroy Russia, the intensity and repetition with which he tackled the subject on Friday suggests this is not just political theatre: he has become a true believer.

What this means for the biggest question of all remains unclear. Does this fervour make him more or less likely to use nuclear weapons? Are his threats a bluff, or not? Again, those in Moscow are no better informed than the rest of us.

“Nobody knows. I doubt if he knows yet either, to be honest,” the source said.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-state-ukraine

What strikes me is that if you replace terms such as "the west" and "NATO" with Democrats" or "liberals," the speech could have come from Marjorie Taylor Greene.

[welch]

Lets skip the last sentence about MTG. Putin is barking mad, howling nonsense at the moon.

And Lyman is surrounded, the Russian garrison cut off from supplies and reinforcements. Reports gathered by ISW suggest that the Russian army has sent forward the first of the 300,000 without any training at all. Pro-Putin propaganda sites present all sorts of promises that "Russia is winning" and that by next March, the Russians will again begin to roll over Ukrainian territory.

It is strange to see what Z-lovers will accept.

[Chip]

Two photos that speak (or howl) for themselves:



I can imagine Trump seeing that and asking: "How come he has the coolest uniforms?"

Putin and henchmen chanting "Russia! Russia! Russia!"

[welch]

Ukraine took Lyman this morning (US time).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ps-in-key-city

[welch]

Oh, and here is the text of Putin's speech. It screams "insanity", "fear', "break down", "Hitler in the bunker".

https://consortiumnews.com/2022/09/3...colonial-west/

Including:

Let’s answer some very simple questions for ourselves. I now want to return to what I said, I want to address all the citizens of the country – not only to those colleagues who are in the hall – to all the citizens of Russia: do we want to have, here, in our country, in Russia, instead of mom and dad there was “parent number one”, “number two”, “number three” – are they completely crazy already there? Do we really want perversions that lead to degradation and extinction to be imposed on children in our schools from the primary grades? To be drummed into them that there are supposedly other genders besides women and men, and to be offered a sex change operation? Do we want all this for our country and our children? For us, all this is unacceptable, we have a different, our own future.

And concluding with a patriotic quote:

And I want to end my speech with the words of a true patriot Ivan Alexandrovich Ilyin: “If I consider Russia my Motherland, then this means that I love in Russian, contemplate and think, sing and speak Russian; that I believe in the spiritual strength of the Russian people. His spirit is my spirit; his fate is my fate; his suffering is my grief; its flowering is my joy.”

Ilyin was a Russian anti-communist exile who fled to Germany, where he poured out fascist theory and snuggled up to Hitler.

(And to connect it all, and as best I remember from a year ago, Ilyin influenced Putin's Rasputin, the "Eurasian Fascist Mystic", Alexander Dugin. Dugin's American-born disciple, Mark Sleboda, posts videos in which he explains global strategy based on having enlisted in the US Navy some years ago. Rewind to the beginning of this discussion for something more about Sleboda)

[welch]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ne-2022-10-04/

Russian defence ministry maps suggest rapid pullbacks in Ukraine
Reuters
LONDON, Oct 4 (Reuters) - Russian defence ministry maps presented on Tuesday appeared to show rapid withdrawals of Russian invasion forces from areas in eastern and southern Ukraine where they have been under severe pressure from a Ukrainian counteroffensive.

The ministry's daily video briefing made no mention of any pullbacks, but on maps used to show the location of purported Russian strikes, the shaded area designating Russian military control was much smaller than the day before.

In northeast Ukraine, where Russia suffered a rout last month, its forces along a frontline running some 70 km southward from Kupiansk along the River Oskil appeared to have retreated some 20 km to the east, as far as the border of Luhansk province.

This would mean they had vacated the last remnants of Ukraine's Kharkiv province - where Russia for several months maintained an occupation administration - but for a small patch between the town of Dvorichna and the Russian border.

[Chip]

Why is that dictatorial regimes always have huge military hats?

Like this one?



Coldstream Guard, England

[welch]

Several reports suggest that there are cracks developing in the Kremlin inner leadership. Most obvious is a split between the "siloviki" -- I call them commanders of the Russian Foreign Legions -- and the Ministry of Defense. The "siloviki" are the owner of the Wagner Group, a mercenary organization, and the Chechen boss.

Russian military bloggers, "milbloggers", constitute a Greek chorus that comments on the factional fighting.

From ISW:

Kateryna Stepanenko, Katherine Lawlor, Grace Mappes, and Frederick W. Kagan

October 7, 9:15 pm ET


Western and Russian reports of fractures within the Kremlin are gaining traction within the Russian information space, undermining the appearance of stability of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime. The Washington Post reported that US intelligence obtained information that a member of Putin’s inner circle directly criticized Putin’s “extensive military shortcomings” during the war in Ukraine, and other Western and Kremlin-affiliated officials noted rising criticism of Putin’s mishandling of the war and mobilization.[1] Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov acknowledged that there have been debates in the Kremlin regarding mobilization in a statement to The Washington Post but denied all allegations of a member of the Kremlin confronting Putin. ISW cannot verify any of these reports are real or assess the likelihood that these arguments or fractures will change Putin’s mind about continuing the war, let alone if they will destabilize his regime. Word of fractures within Putin’s inner circle have reached the hyper-patriotic and nationalist milblogger crowd, however, undermining the impression of strength and control that Putin has sought to portray throughout his reign.

Some Russian milbloggers have begun speculating that there are two factions within the Kremlin following Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov and Wagner Private Military Company financier Yevgeny Prigozhin’s harsh criticism of the Russian higher military command.[2] A milblogger told his nearly one million readers that Kadyrov and Prigozhin are part of the faction that seeks to continue the war and accomplish its ideological goals regardless of cost. The milblogger noted that the faction opposed to them consisted of government officials who wish to negotiate with the West to save their assets and residences in the West but are too afraid to confront Putin directly. The milblogger expressed hope that the pro-war faction will defeat the faction that fails to see that Russia cannot afford to end the war.

The presentation of fundamental disagreements within Putin’s inner circle and challenges to his decisions, even if quiet, within the Russian nationalist space risks depicting Putin as weak and not fully in control of his government. The truth or falseness of that presentation is less important than its injection into the audiences on which Putin most relies for continued support in his war. Putin himself may have externalized his own concerns about this break in the façade of his power and of the unanimity of his trusted senior officials in an odd exchange with a teacher on October 5.[3] Putin asked the teacher how he taught his students about the causes of the Pugachev Rebellion that challenged Catherine the Great in the mid-1770s.[4] The teacher, from Izhevsk, one of the towns that Pugachev captured during his revolt, offered answers that did not satisfy Putin, including the observation that the rebellion had occurred because of the appearance of “a leader who could capitalize on a wave of dissatisfaction,” and that the lesson to be drawn from that episode of history was “that it is necessary to respect the views of other members of society.” Putin offered his own answer: “The leader [Pugachev] claimed to be tsar. And how did that arise? Why was that possible?...Because of the element of weakening of the central power.”[5] The exchange was bizarre and fascinating since there is no reason Pugachev’s Rebellion should have been on Putin’s mind at this time, nor any reason for him to worry about someone else “claiming to be tsar.”—unless, of course, Putin himself perceives a weakening of the central power, i.e., himself.[6]

Kadyrov and Prigozhin will likely attempt to make minor ground advances in Donetsk Oblast to maintain their prominence and reputation in the nationalist and proxy information spaces. Russian forces have been making incremental advances around Bakhmut and Avdiivka between October 6 and October 7, likely with the support of Wagner and Kadyrov’s elements in the area. Some milbloggers and Ukrainian officials reported that Prigozhin committed 1,000 of his troops to strengthen positions in Lysychansk to secure Russian frontlines following the collapse of the Lyman frontline.[7] Head of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) Denis Pushilin even awarded Kadyrov the title of hero of the DNR.[8] The claims about Kadyrov and Prigozhin making gains and preparing to save the day coincides with Kremlin efforts to improve the reputation of the Commander of the Central Military District, Colonel-General Alexander Lapin whom they both attacked earlier.[9] Milbloggers even reported meeting Lapin, who is now reportedly commanding the Svatove-Kreminna frontline in Luhansk Oblast.[10]

Russian President Vladimir Putin may have waited to announce that he had replaced Eastern Military District (EMD) Commander Aleksandr Chaiko until Putin could use Chaiko as a scapegoat for Russian military failures in Kharkiv and Lyman. Russian media reported on October 7 that Putin replaced Chaiko with Lieutenant General Rustam Muradov. Chaiko is the second military district commander to be replaced since the Russian lines in Kharkiv collapsed—Putin replaced the Western Military District commander on October 3, as ISW previously reported.[11] Oddly, Russian milbloggers first reported that Muradov had replaced Chaiko on September 4, but the Kremlin has yet to formally confirm the appointment.[12] State-run and independent media outlets quoted the governor of Dagestan congratulating Muradov on his appointment and cited an entry in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities to confirm the replacement.[13] Muradov had previously commanded the eastern grouping of Russian forces in Ukraine, which is likely comprised of elements of the EMD, as of July.[14]

The ISW page lists the references.

https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...ment-october-7

[Chip]

Key bridge linking Crimea to Russia hit by huge explosion

Section of Kerch bridge collapses after blast, seen as major blow to Russian military prestige


Peter Beaumont in Kyiv and Emma Graham-Harrison in Lviv
Sat 8 Oct 2022



A huge explosion has destroyed part of the Kerch bridge from Russia to Crimea, a hated symbol of the Kremlin’s occupation of the southern Ukrainian peninsula, one of Vladimir Putin’s prestige projects and a vital logistical link for the Russian military. A section of the Ukraine-bound road bridge collapsed into the Kerch strait after the blast, and a fierce fire engulfed a train on the parallel railway connection, creating a vast column of black smoke. The parallel road towards Russia still appeared passable in images from the blast site.

The attack, which came the day after Putin’s 70th birthday, is a major blow to Russian military prestige and its supply chains for the invasion and the defence of Crimea. Moscow had claimed the bridge was protected by impenetrable layers of defences, ranging from military dolphins to the latest weapons systems, but had also threatened harsh retaliation if it was targeted.

Ukraine has not directly claimed responsibility for hitting the bridge, but senior officials publicly celebrated and on Saturday morning the only real question about the attack was not who ordered it, but how it was carried out. The explosion, which witnesses said could be heard miles away, happened about 6am on Saturday while a train was crossing the bridge. Pictures of the damage began emerging soon after.

Russia set up a committee to investigate the attack and within hours said three people had been killed and blamed a truck bomb for the blast. It added that they identified the driver of the exploded truck as a resident of the southern Russian Kuban region.

“According to preliminary data, three people died as a result of the incident. These are, presumably, the passengers of a car that was next to the blown-up truck,” Russia’s investigative committee said in a statement.

“At present, the bodies of two dead men and women have already been raised from the water; their identities are being established.”

Footage shared on Russian Telegram channels and news agencies appeared to show the moment of the explosion with two vehicles, a truck and a car, at the centre of the blast, although it was unclear whether either was responsible or simply caught up in the detonation.

The bridge, which was built on the orders of Putin, and inaugurated in 2018, was a key transport link for carrying military equipment to Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine, especially in the south, as well as ferrying troops there.

[welch]

A Russian who puts up YouTube videos as "Military Summary" insists that this is the third most lucky day for Russia in the invasion (oops, the Special Military Operation, or "SMOO").

Just proving that there are, yes, really, people who believe this sort of thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbZ8M-GO1kI

"If you say the war is going well for Russia, I've got a bridge to sell you."

[dneal]

A Russian who puts up YouTube videos as "Military Summary" insists that this is the third most lucky day for Russia in the invasion (oops, the Special Military Operation, or "SMOO").

Just proving that there are, yes, really, people who believe this sort of thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbZ8M-GO1kI

"If you say the war is going well for Russia, I've got a bridge to sell you."

I’ve recently been following Igor from Kyiv

Like your link, everything is of course suspect for reasons ranging from simply being wrong to being part of an information operation.

The twitter link has Russians surrendering, complaining about lack of equipment and supplies, etc…. Probably actual events (but Ukraine could easily stage most of these, and they do get training and advice from us…), but it appears genuine. Either way, it is very useful for building morale on one side and destroying it on the other.

Now is a key time for Ukraine to increase efforts along these lines.

[Chip]

One item that's becoming more evident is that Ukraine can deploy partisans, saboteurs, special ops (whatever) behind Russian lines and do significant damage.

Has Russia pulled off any similar attack behind Ukrainian lines?

[welch]

One item that's becoming more evident is that Ukraine can deploy partisans, saboteurs, special ops (whatever) behind Russian lines and do significant damage.

Has Russia pulled off any similar attack behind Ukrainian lines?

Seems to me that Russia just fires missiles wherever it wants. Sadly.

[dneal]

One item that's becoming more evident is that Ukraine can deploy partisans, saboteurs, special ops (whatever) behind Russian lines and do significant damage.

Has Russia pulled off any similar attack behind Ukrainian lines?

Seems to me that Russia just fires missiles wherever it wants. Sadly.

To Chip's point, most of that is simply because Ukraine is the invaded country. Home field advantage, in layman's terms. As the aggressor, your forward lines bypass civilian populations and put them (and partisans) behind it.

Further exacerbating the issue is the morale of new conscripts. While it's most likely the bridge to Crimea was a Ukrainian strike (especially if we gave them ATACMS and just aren't admitting it publicly yet). It is also possible (and plausible) that it was a sabotage operation - but the saboteurs were Russian conscripts.

[Chip]

Recent history has given us quite a few lessons in low-tech asymmetrical warfare, courtesy of the IRA, Daesh, the Taliban, ISIS, et al.

A truck bomb is easy and cheap to assemble, and depends on the ubiquitous presence of cargo trucks in most places. The applications are limited only by the vigilance of the target entity and the tolerance of the bombers for civilian death and damage. For a major strike, three lives seems like a modest amount of collateral damage.

To take down that sort of bridge, I might get a stealth GPS drone boat (least possible number of ferrous metal components) and one or more inflatable rafts (with steel parts such as d-rings replaced with plastic) to thwart radar. The rafts would be loaded with explosives and set to detonate when the GPS link was interrupted (by passing under the bridge). The drone would tow them into position in fog or other weather unfavorable to observation.

The Russians claim to have a force of trained military dolphins protecting the bridge.

Strange days. eh?

[dneal]

The Russians claim a lot of stuff. The T14 Armata will shoot down incoming tank rounds and all sorts of other things. They can shoot down cruise missiles (but strangely let 60 some-odd fly overhead when we attacked their allies in Syria).

As to the comments on truck bombs, boats, and how GPS or radar works... The most diplomatic thing I can say is that that it's not quite correct. GPS, for example, needs at least 3 satellites to triangulate a position. It usually has a lock to 5 or more satellites. A bridge won't block the signal because the satellites are at different azimuths and elevations. A Q36 or Q37 radar can pick up stray bullets from an Arab wedding, and even birds. The software normally screens that out.

[Chip]

I've set up GPS for our river surveys, including RTK (Real-Time Kinetic) arrays with two earth stations. Have you ever set up a GPS system?

If the bottom of the bridge is close to the water, it will certainly block the satellite signals, unless the satellite is on the horizon. Pretty simple to time that, or specify a certain signal to activate the device.

Or you could just use a cellphone.

[dneal]

Chip, "setting up" GPS systems involves launching satellites. No, I haven't done that and neither have you. An RTK system merely has a ground station that allows the (improved) receivers to communicate with each other for an even more accurate position - primarily relating to elevation. You set up a survey system that uses GPS, not a "GPS system".

I'm happy to bicker and sling vitriol in some other thread. The primary reason I pointed out some of the many things that are incorrect in your post is that others read this thread. Warfare is loaded with uncertainty (Clausewitz's "Fog of War"). Lack of information, unintentional to deliberate misinformation, etc... I am providing clarity for them, not trying to embarrass you. If you are experiencing the latter, perhaps you shouldn't speak so authoritatively about things I doubt you have any experience with - like the cost and ease of building truck bombs.

[Chip]

Curious bit on GPS.

Years ago, I worked on a survey of Knife Point Glacier using early GPS gear loaned by a mineral-lease survey outfit.



We shot the margins of the glacier and then ran a series of traverses, hoping to calculate volume.

Starting a new line, we'd go back and shoot the first point on the previous line, which I marked with carpenter's chalk on the ice. But we couldn't get a fix.

After a night tossing and turning in my sleeping bag, I realized that was because the glacier was moving. So our previous line had gone downhill, so to speak.

So we adjusted our technique and it came out fine.

[dneal]

Back on topic...

Cruise missile strikes on Kyiv

Putin reportedly saying attacks in civilian areas are a response to the bridge attack.

Stupid move on Putin's part, because intentionally targeting civilian populations (and admitting to it publicly) is an unambiguous confession to a war crime. A bridge is a legitimate military target.