ok what the fuck is happening in ukraine

Another paywalled USA Today story, but here's something:

While Russia is committing war crimes in Ukraine they have shifted their tactics of propaganda to Spotify.
Must read by @Amanda_Florian with comments by me. It is insane how Russia weaponizes everything including playlists on Spotify like Bomb Kyiv https://t.co/8fRcsB3QaL

— Olga Lautman 🇺🇦 (@OlgaNYC1211) March 7, 2022

Is it okay to leave Spotify now, or would it still be censorship?

This Z thing...unless I'm missing something (could well be) it seems so Q-like in its vapidity part of me thinks the best approach is for Ukraine/Zelensky supporters to just start using it everywhere also, with the more obvious meaning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvS8IZQHc5U

All sorts of upheavals are coming if this keeps up.

The wheat price is up 65% in a week.

Oil is through $127 a barrel.

The effects on poverty and cost of living in this country will be enormous. People will starve in their homes.

And all the while millionaires and billionaires see their biggest wealth increase EVER in history. pic.twitter.com/NYGbXsOaQ5

— Gary Stevenson (@garyseconomics) March 7, 2022

starting to get the feeling every major leader is going to be fucked by this, a la the financial crisis of 2007/8

which is a massive incentive for every major leader to keep buying oil and gas from putin obv

Let's be hopeful.

Russia spokesman:

- Ukraine must amend its constitution, reject claims to enter any bloc i.e. NATO

- Must recognise Crimea as Russia as well as Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

Says if these conditions are met, Russia military action will stop in a moment.

— Moe (@moneyacademyKE) March 7, 2022

"Just give us...everything we want and this could all go away (for a while)."

Two persons close to the Russia-Ukraine negotiations (including back channel talks) tell me Russia proposed (1) Zelensky remains pro forma president but Russia appoints Boiko as PM, (2) Ukraine recognizes L/DNR and Crimea, (3) No NATO. Ze told them emphatically no.

— Christo Grozev (@christogrozev) March 7, 2022

ze answer is non

nul points

i’m not seeing that reported anywhere?

Incredible to see this being handed out at Slovakian/Ukrainian border - in my time reporting on migration I’ve never seen protection rights explained so clearly & given so easily. It’s absolutely as it should be but a world away from so many others experience of refuge in EU. pic.twitter.com/eoqsyI77Ek

— Katy Fallon (@katymfallon) March 7, 2022

Peskov apparently announced this to reporters earlier, leaving out the Boyko bit:

The Kremlin has announced its demands for ending the war in Ukraine:
-Ukraine must change its constitution to guarantee it won't join any "blocs", i.e. NATO + EU.
-Must recognise Crimea as part of Russia.
-Must recognise the eastern separatist regions as independent.

— Patrick Reevell (@Reevellp) March 7, 2022

Putin is the kind of homicidal spurned lover who decides if he can't have his beloved then no one else will either.

Does even floating that stuff imply that Russia knows it stepped in it?

so what is the deal with the Black Sun symbols on so many Ukrainians? I'm seeing conflicting crap.

Soundgarden fans

Surely not to “wash away Ukraine”

It’s a neo-nazi symbol used by Azov but I would guess they’re over-represented in terms of how many photos get taken of them.

unfortunately accepting something like those terms is likely the best way to end the war.

End, or postpone?

nato isn't going to directly intervene to help ukraine because it risks a catastrophic expansion of the conflict. so ukraine is not in a position to win in a direct military confrontation. basically, we are looking at a protracted occupation and insurgency unless the russian army goes home.

so yeah, these terms are not good and they undermine ukrainian sovereignty by limiting their right of association, but they don't seem to have another option.

maybe a more creative person can envision a better outcome.

Crimea and NATO are possible bargaining chips but giving up any potential EU membership and Donbas would be difficult.

Russia’s angle on the Minsk agreements was that Russia-leaning areas of Ukraine could permanently frustrate any major foreign policy move like NATO / EU membership. There aren’t really going to be any Russia-leaning areas of Ukraine after this, particularly if the LNR / DNR become independent, so the only ongoing leverage on future governments would be the threat of reinvasion.

At the same time, the coup / revolution in 2014 was motivated by the failure to sign an EU trade deal and there have been repeated threats to coup Zelenskiy during his time in office if he took closer European integration off the table, so it would be a recipe for decades of domestic instability.

Don't they do more than undermine Ukrainian sovereignty by forcing Ukraine to accept that three more or less invaded (and one presumes permanently occupied) regions now belong to Russia, and that they are not going to do anything about it? Doesn't that invite further incursions with no notice? I don't know a better solution, but I suppose that hinges on just what problem Ukraine wants to solve.

this seems bad

Putin appears to be laying the groundwork for a nuclear strike. pic.twitter.com/zQDxxEu2E1

— Rick Perlstein (@rickperlstein) March 7, 2022

Kharkiv is 40km from the Russian border. It’s probably safe to assume Russia isn’t going to nuke it.

By "nuclear strike" do we mean that Russia intends to use a nuclear weapon, or that they intend to strike that nuclear reactor and blame Ukraine? The former seems unlikely, and either way I don't think it's worth jumping to such conclusions based on 1 piece of Russian propaganda.

xp

>> we are looking at a protracted occupation and insurgency unless until the russian army goes home

Ukraine is a big country. Much bigger and more populous than Afghanistan, where the Russians were bogged down for yeeeeears. Even if they seize the major cities, the idea that they're going to be able to "occupy" or control the country without just flattening it (which is really hard to call a victory, since what will Russia have gained?) is kind of hard to credit. The Ukrainians are going to resist to the last man, the Russian soldiers don't want to be there, and the EU will flood the country with weapons. It will be one of the best funded insurgencies ever. And economic sanctions against Russia will persist every day they're still in Ukraine. This is a no-win situation for Putin; the only question is how much damage he does to Ukraine and other countries while grinding his way toward his eventual massive, catastrophic, Russia-rupturing failure.

Isn't Putin worried at all about other regions in Russia deciding now is great time to declare independence while the entire Russian army is bogged down in Ukraine?

tbf afghanistan has a very weird terrain and climate which make it next to impossible for anyone to control

Ukraine is a big country. Much bigger and more populous than Afghanistan, where the Russians were bogged down for yeeeeears.

this was my point? ukrainians fighting "to the last man" and the cities existing in a state of constant guerilla warfare is not a good option for ukrainians.

without just flattening it (which is really hard to call a victory, since what will Russia have gained?)

everything it says it wants?

Even if they seize the major cities, the idea that they're going to be able to "occupy" or control the country without just flattening it (which is really hard to call a victory, since what will Russia have gained?) is kind of hard to credit.

Unfortunately, the mindset of leaders who have fully committed their nation to a war of attrition, fighting an opponent too weak to conquer them, is to keep rolling the dice in the expectation that their opponent will eventually weaken to where they capitulate or the war simply peters out in the face of superior force. And, yes, Putin would call that a victory.

idk what part of "biden wouldnt tolerate a communist mexico" isnt getting through here tbh, every other theory seems to find followers

Isn't that essentially Mearsheimer's point? He says NATO should have let Russia have its sphere of influence, not expanded to Eastern Europe.

A long-term insurgency seems likely, and I'm wondering about effects/pressures of that, also of long-term sanctions, on West and Russia, also world economy.

Here is the full video of Ukraine's women-warriors' address to Russians. I am so proud. pic.twitter.com/EOzS9YlU9W

— Nika Melkozerova (@NikaMelkozerova) March 7, 2022

(re Professor Look Back In Realness, should NATO now abandon its Eastern members? How bout former Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Poland, Hungary? Will it be that or Nukes?)

question mark shouldn't be there xp

Uh, Afghanistan is bigger than Ukraine.

Also there's not that big a difference in the size of their population.

Based on the New Yorker interview, I would guess that Mearsheimer would say it was a mistake to admit those Eastern countries to NATO, but that now that it's done, he seems to think that Russia can live with it provided that we give them some of the other things they want. Unfortunately Chotiner was more interested in playing gotcha than getting him to talk about what he thinks we should do now.

xps

Update: US official: Russia has brought 100% of its forces mobilized for the war to Ukraine.

— EndGameWW3 🇺🇸 (@EndGameWW3) March 7, 2022

Further to that, so far:

The Pentagon does not seen any indications of additional Russian forces moving toward Ukraine, senior U.S. defense official says.

— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) March 7, 2022

Russians don’t want to give 110%. Typical.

However, in response to the question about why Mearsheimer-style realism isn't that popular right now, I guess it's pretty obvious. When you have people fighting and dying for an ideal of freedom right in front of your eyes, its very distasteful to say they should just accept their station as a neighbor of the Russian bear and not dream too big.

Mearsheimer also has the problem of being a China hawk, which makes his (mostly correct IMO) NATO/Eastern European argument a bit odd given that he'd likely want us to go to war for Taiwan's sovereignty.