Russia-Ukraine

[lizkat]

And the "sudden" death (a cardiac arrest apparently) of the foreign minister of Belarus, Mr Vladimir Makei, was reported a few short days ago.

And no, if this was indeed murder most foul (as some sources have suggested), then not one single source - western, Belarusian, or, for that matter, Russian, has thought to lay the blame for this action at the feet of the President of the country, Mr Lukashenko.

Possibly Lukashenko is quite busy wondering if he's next.

For awhile Lukashenko tried to maintain a semblance of independence from Moscow, but once he had had to ask his ally for assistance in quelling the 2020-21 uprisings by his own citizens, the helpful response by Putin pretty much sealed a convenient "soft acquisition" of Belarus by Russia. Not long after, Russian troops that were there "by invitation" for military drills were then parked near the border with Ukraine. A Russian military presence in Belarus is probably never going to go away.

There was also that hokey referendum in Belarus late last winter, almost coincident with Russia's invasion of Ukraine. A bunch of changes were proposed for the Belarusian constitution, including revocation of its prior status as a nuclear free zone, so to allow the country once again to host nukes owned by Russia for the first time since the fall of the USSR.

The referendum itself only had one question, no details... and was posed in Russian: "Do you accept the amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus?"

The fix was apparently in, since the question passed with about 65% approval. It was denounced as a complete sham by EU, US and by the Belarusian opposition situated in Poland.

So I dunno. Was the late foreign minister Mr. Makei critical of any of this stuff? Seems to me Lukashenko might have tolerated such talk, at least behind closed doors. After all there was a time he had wanted to demonstrate to the west that there was daylight between Belarus and Russia.

But if Putin was aware that there was "private" grumbling in high places in Minsk about Russia regaining control of Belarus, who could be surprised if Makei's name was not the only one on some Russian agency's list of inconvenient people?

The referendum in Belarus extended Lukashenko's right to rule until 2035. Maybe Putin has decided he'd rather nudge someone else into place sooner. So then why not start with a hand picked successor to Makei as foreign minister, eh? Will be interesting to see who gets that slot and what western analysts think of the pick.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Some of the (exiled and other) Russian sources I have read seemed to think that both Makei and Lukashenko were attempting to preserve the independence and sovereignty of Belarus and that they were also attempting to discreetly distance themselves from any serious involvement in the "special military operation" and had become quite skilled in advancing reasons, excuses, explanations, justifications why Belarus was unable to commit itself with greater enthusiasm to this cause.

Certainly, while people do die from heart attacks, the timing of this death - along with the senior (and trusted) position held by the deceased - coupled with the absolutely extraordinary numbers of strange (and sudden) deaths of members of the Russian military and economic elite in recent months - would give rise to, if not dark suspicions, at the very least, several searching questions.

While I don't know (and cannot say) that Mr Makei was murdered, I will admit to some considerable surprise if we learn subsequently that he was not.

 

[bwinter88]

Between foreign leaders, domestic oligarchs, and conscripted citizens, there is a dwindling population in that region who must feel safe from an untimely death at Putin’s hands. It boggles my mind how he retains as much support as he does. Surely the ones still alive so far must be realizing that Putin needs to be retired before they are next.

 

[Herdfan]

Between foreign leaders, domestic oligarchs, and conscripted citizens, there is a dwindling population in that region who must feel safe from an untimely death at Putin’s hands. It boggles my mind how he retains as much support as he does. Surely the ones still alive so far must be realizing that Putin needs to be retired before they are next.

But how can you get him out? As you noted it, how he has the support he does remains a mystery.

 

[Yoused]

A facility being used a a base of operations for the Wagner Group – White-wing Russian mercenaries who have also been supporting the Ukraine attack – in the Central African Republic was bombed by an anonymous plane. CAR government reports that the plane appears to have left their airspace in a northerly direction, which would suggest that it came from Chad, with whom CAR has been having issues.

I hear tell that Chad employs Ukrainian mercenaries to fly their warplanes. Vlad may not have started an actual world war, but …

 

[bwinter88]

But how can you get him out? As you noted it, how he has the support he does remains a mystery.

From what I can glean from my Russian friends who have family in the country, it's a "stick with the devil you know" mentality.

 

[AG_PhamD]

Some of the (exiled and other) Russian sources I have read seemed to think that both Makei and Lukashenko were attempting to preserve the independence and sovereignty of Belarus and that they were also attempting to discreetly distance themselves from any serious involvement in the "special military operation" and had become quite skilled in advancing reasons, excuses, explanations, justifications why Belarus was unable to commit itself with greater enthusiasm to this cause.

It appears the Belarusian people have little appetite for involving themselves in the ”special military operation”. AFAIK they’re already suffering suffering under many of the same sanctions as Russia.

Belarus has already given Russia a bunch of military hardware including tanks, combat vehicles, artillery, missiles, etc. The amount of active equipment they claim vs how much is likely active are probably two very different things- much like in Russian. And what they do have is dated, Soviet Era stuff.

Their annual defense budget for the past decade has been around $700m… minus the money that goes to corruption. One would infer very little maintenance has been happening, new and sophisticated equipment is not being purchased, and perhaps most importantly- little quality training is occurring.

I would think at the the end of the day Belarus doesn’t have much to give except people- allegedly ~48,000 active soldiers. If Belarus attacked Russia, presumably most/all of their soldiers would have to defend their own 1000km border with Ukraine. Likely reserves and/or conscripts be drawn up but they probably don’t even have the necessary equipment in the proper numbers to sustain this, maybe even initiate it. Belarus attacking only serves to distract Ukraine and seemingly gains nothing except perhaps a little more affection from a pariah state with increasingly less and less to offer others.

It’s also worth noting Belarus preformed extremely poorly in WWII. More than 25% of their population was killed (almost 2.5m people or about 15% of all WWII deaths).

I can’t blame the Belarusian civilians or government for having zero interest getting involved, even if they do have positive feelings towards Russia or support Russia’s invasion.

 

[AG_PhamD]

Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN

Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.

www.cnn.com

Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow.

Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part).

Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.

 

[Eric]

Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN

Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.

www.cnn.com

Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow.

Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part).

Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.

Good, Russia is relentlessly bombing their country, they have every right to fight back and send some bombs over the border. We should all be encouraging this, if Russia doesn't like it they can simply end the war but to warn them off is ridiculous.

 

[Yoused]

The second largest bank in the country, state-owned VTB, is (or was) fighting off a massive DDoS, the likes of which is entirely unprecedented.

Russian state-owned bank VTB hit by largest DDoS attack in its history

A bank spokesman claims that it is primarily foreign-sourced, but they are also seeing domestic IPs, which they will turn over to the Gestapo authorities, because no one has ever, not even once, heard of personal computers and IoT devices being hijacked without their owners knowing.

 

[Nycturne]

Good, Russia is relentlessly bombing their country, they have every right to fight back and send some bombs over the border. We should all be encouraging this, if Russia doesn't like it they can simply end the war but to warn them off is ridiculous.

I tend to be of the mind that you shouldn’t have to resort to jumping into the mud just because the other side is wallowing in it. So long as they are focusing on military infrastructure though, with the goal being to erode the military’s will to continue, or reduce Russia’s ability to place it’s full effort on the front lines within Ukraine, I have no problem with it. I mean honestly, this shows an awful lot of audacity on the part of Ukraine here, and I don’t mean that in a bad way.

Even better if they are doing this with either their own equipment, or equipment borrowed from Russia. It allows NATO countries that are providing support and aid to have plausible deniability. It’s a bit of a fine line we are trying to walk here, where we want to enable Ukraine to protect it’s sovereignty, but at the same time, we don’t want to encourage escalation by making it appear we are providing material support support for direct attacks on Russian soil either. And to be clear, the sort of escalation I’m talking about here is the kind where Russian allies like China or India decide to jump in and throw material at Putin to use in retaliation.

 

[AG_PhamD]

I tend to be of the mind that you shouldn’t have to resort to jumping into the mud just because the other side is wallowing in it. So long as they are focusing on military infrastructure though, with the goal being to erode the military’s will to continue, or reduce Russia’s ability to place it’s full effort on the front lines within Ukraine, I have no problem with it. I mean honestly, this shows an awful lot of audacity on the part of Ukraine here, and I don’t mean that in a bad way.

Even better if they are doing this with either their own equipment, or equipment borrowed from Russia. It allows NATO countries that are providing support and aid to have plausible deniability. It’s a bit of a fine line we are trying to walk here, where we want to enable Ukraine to protect it’s sovereignty, but at the same time, we don’t want to encourage escalation by making it appear we are providing material support support for direct attacks on Russian soil either. And to be clear, the sort of escalation I’m talking about here is the kind where Russian allies like China or India decide to jump in and throw material at Putin to use in retaliation.

These are not only exclusively military targets, but they are bases from which Russia has been launching attacks. Therefore they are legitimate, legal attacks. I’m sure Ukraine would prefer have not to have to do this, but one would expect nothing less when one country invaded another for frivolous reasons.

It’s also worth noting, Ukraine can’t really escalate things any higher with Russia… unless Russia chooses to use weapons of mass destruction, which so think is highly unlikely. They can’t effectively target military assets and have largely resorted to taking out Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. At this point, barring WMD’s, there’s not much more than can do that they haven’t been.

I too think it was a very wise decision Ukraine used their own equipment. It would not go over well with Russia if NATO hardware was used. That said, I would not be surprised if the US/NATO helped coordinate the attack and provide technical assistance upgrading the presumed drone model. Shortly before the attack the Pentagon announced they modified the HIMARS launchers sent to Ukraine not accept the long range ATACMS missiles that we have routinely denied requests for. (Many other countries have ATACMS that could be provided). I would imagine at the very least we provided satellite imagery to know when to attack and what defense systems should be avoided in routing.

Russia says the drone that hit one the bases imply minor damaged was incurred on two planes as a result of being shot down and the debris falling on the aircraft. This very well may be true, but the fact the drone made it 500km into Russia territory at subsonic speeds and weren’t shot down until they were immediately above their target should be quite embarrassing and concerning. Looking at the damage of one of the planes, I don’t think it will be flying anytime soon, if ever.

The wings mechanization clearly looks like it’s gone and the wing structure very well might be too. It’s also worth noting these have swing wings, which involves a lot of engineering. It looks like the afterburners have melted away, or at least the nozzles. The extremely delicate and expensive engine turbines are probably ruined too. Considering the Tu-22 was last built in 1969, I would think it would be scavenged for parts and scrapped. So much for “light damage”

The other plane damaged was reportedly a Tu-95, which I can’t seem to find pictures of. So either the damage was so minimal it’s not worth showing or so bad that they can’t.

 

[leman]

Attacks on Russian air bases put spotlight on new Ukrainian drone program | CNN

Multiple attacks targeting Russian military infrastructure this week have focused attention on Ukraine's efforts to develop longer-range combat drones.

www.cnn.com

Ukraine successfully hit two Russian airbases deep within Russian territory, one of them within 125 miles of Moscow.

Rather interesting considering Russia is supposed to have the most sophisticated, multilayer air defense in the world. I would remind people that in 1987 a German teenager flew a Cessna from Germany all the way through Russia into Moscow, with his transponder turned on, and landed in Red Square without being detected until the last minute when there was nothing that could be done. This was due to numerous oversights by Russian air defense (and a bit of luck on the pilots part).

Likely this was a modified soviet-reconnaissance drone or potentially Ukraine has successfully launched its first long range attack drone. Surely some people will be fired and Russia will have to focus more attention on defending their domestic military infrastructure.

There is a joke about that. After the Mathias Rust incident it is said that Gorbachev has ordered the Soviet air defence personnel to start drinking, as downing a glass would require them to lift the head up and actually look at the sky.

 

[Nycturne]

These are not only exclusively military targets, but they are bases from which Russia has been launching attacks. Therefore they are legitimate, legal attacks. I’m sure Ukraine would prefer have not to have to do this, but one would expect nothing less when one country invaded another for frivolous reasons.

Oh, I’m not suggesting Ukraine has overstepped. More that I think there’s a clear distinction between what Ukraine has been doing up to this point, and what Russia has been doing, and that I don’t think Ukraine should sink down to Russia’s level and start attacking civilian infrastructure.

The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate.

I too think it was a very wise decision Ukraine used their own equipment. It would not go over well with Russia if NATO hardware was used. That said, I would not be surprised if the US/NATO helped coordinate the attack and provide technical assistance upgrading the presumed drone model. Shortly before the attack the Pentagon announced they modified the HIMARS launchers sent to Ukraine not accept the long range ATACMS missiles that we have routinely denied requests for. (Many other countries have ATACMS that could be provided). I would imagine at the very least we provided satellite imagery to know when to attack and what defense systems should be avoided in routing.

Agreed. It’s why I mentioned plausible deniability. Are we supplying Ukraine with intelligence? Yes. Could Ukraine have acted on provided intelligence on their own in this case? Also yes. It‘s enough that the truth of how much the US/NATO assist in these type of operations is lost in rumor and speculation, leaving Russia guessing as to how much we contributed.

 

[AG_PhamD]

Oh, I’m not suggesting Ukraine has overstepped. More that I think there’s a clear distinction between what Ukraine has been doing up to this point, and what Russia has been doing, and that I don’t think Ukraine should sink down to Russia’s level and start attacking civilian infrastructure.

The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate.



Agreed. It’s why I mentioned plausible deniability. Are we supplying Ukraine with intelligence? Yes. Could Ukraine have acted on provided intelligence on their own in this case? Also yes. It‘s enough that the truth of how much the US/NATO assist in these type of operations is lost in rumor and speculation, leaving Russia guessing as to how much we contributed.

Yes, I got what you were saying. Sorry if my response sounded like the opposite.

I’m not sure we fully understand what really happened to the bridge. All we know is what the Russians told us and not to say they always lie because they don’t, but they lie so often it’s hard to know when they’re telling the truth. I think it’s fair to assume Ukrainian military/intelligence was responsible and that a 3rd but I suppose that’s not proven publicly. The bridge was a vital route for bringing military supplies and on-military into Crimea. Considering there are other, less efficient routes to bring in non-military supplies, I think it’s a fair target. That said, if it’s true that the explosives were on a truck and if the driver was a civilian and unwilling participant, that’s not good. Then again, this is war and Ukraine doesn’t have the same luxuries we have with long range precision weapons. One could argue killing one civilian is worth saving many others, but still shouldn’t be the how things are done ideally. It could be argued if the truck driver or trucking company had been involved with supplying war materials, they could be considered a legitimate target.

Personally, I think the US should stay out of making claims of helping Ukrainians with attacks, like they did with the Moskva. It only raises tensions and I’d imagine the Russians are already well aware of this or suspect it. Such claims only bolster the Russian propaganda about directly fighting NATO and how the US wants to destroy Russia. It also takes credit away from the Ukrainians on the ground doing the most challenging work and taking the greatest risks.

 

[Macky-Mac]

...The attack on the bridge between Crimea and Russia is a tricky one, but seeking to cripple it with a small scale attack to slow the flow of military supplies does show restraint, which I appreciate. ...

I'm going to disagree and say there's no question that the Crimea bridge was (and continues to be) a legitimate military target for Ukraine......further; missile launch sites inside Russia, air fields where bombers and missile launching air craft are based, ports in Crimea where Russian war ships are based......these are all legitimate targets for Ukraine as it tries to defend itself from the Russian invasion.

What Ukraine doesn't have much of, but needs, are weapons that can reach those targets.

 

[AG_PhamD]

I'm going to disagree and say there's no question that the Crimea bridge was (and continues to be) a legitimate military target for Ukraine......further; missile launch sites inside Russia, air fields where bombers and missile launching air craft are based, ports in Crimea where Russian war ships are based......these are all legitimate targets for Ukraine as it tries to defend itself from the Russian invasion.

What Ukraine doesn't have much of, but needs, are weapons that can reach those targets.

Yes. The bridge was a vital route for the supply of fuel and weapons to Crimea, particularly the rail component. Without the rails, it takes trucks 3-4+ days to go the long route from the Russian side of the bridge, around the Sea of Azov, through their newly acquired land bridge, back down into Crimea. This alternative route is very dangerous because it’s within firing range of Ukraine and these supply lines are attacked regularly. Plus, if you’re talking about fuel, Russia has lost many fuel trucks and has had to supplement with civilian models. They are also muncher smaller than your average American tanker truck. Taking the long road is incredibly inefficient.

Cutting off the supply lines to Crimea is probably in large part responsible for Ukraine being able to take back Kherson.

I wonder if it was indeed a truck bomb, how they timed it to explode while a fuel train was also traveling across or did they just get lucky? Would the bomb alone have taken out the rail lines?

Ukraine claims to be in the final testing stages of their own, domestically produced strike drone with a range of 1000km. Assuming they can produce these at scale, Russia may have a new problem to deal with.

 

[Eric]

We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.

 

[MEJHarrison]

We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.

On the other hand, if they can beat them without stooping down to their level, they'll come out the other end in much better shape.

 

[bwinter88]

We should also be giving them cluster bombs, I get that it's illegal in many countries but as long as they're hitting Russian bases it's justified. Russia is using them to kill civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, apartments, etc. It's only fair that they're able to fight back with the same fire power.

Putin would be obligated to respond to the perceived escalation of US or NATO weapons being used on Russian homeland. Ukraine has been very careful to only use its own drones on these airbases. Ukraine has already won this war—it is now certain to turn towards the west while Putin has failed to achieve anything he promised from this conflict. He is a pariah on the world stage, Russia's military and economy is in shambles. Ukraine need only keep up the tempo to keep pressure on Russia and prevent them from pausing the conflict to regroup.