Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Switzerland giving Ukraine a nice treat, in the form of +7 Billion $.

Bill Browder basically sees no reason whatsoever why all the frozen 'Russian' assets can't be handed over to UKR. At 13:21 in the video below:

 
Bill Browder basically sees no reason whatsoever why all the frozen 'Russian' assets can't be handed over to UKR. At 13:21 in the video below:


Richard Haass explained a different point of view on Ezra Klein podcast recently. He was of the opinion that Ukraine would not be able to win its objectives (going back to the 2014 boundaries prior to the illegal annexation of Crimea) militarily. He thought it would make more sense to hold Russian assets until they can be used to negotiate with Russia after military stalemate. I can’t remember the quote exactly, but it was something to the effect of “they don’t need money now, they need ammo. They should save the money to negotiate later.”

I am still pulling for Ukraine to get what they need to win, and for regime change in Russia, but I can also see his point about holding back some cards. Of course, money can buy some ammo, but US & NATO countries can probably deliver better than what Ukraine can buy.
 
Richard Haass explained a different point of view on Ezra Klein podcast recently. He was of the opinion that Ukraine would not be able to win its objectives (going back to the 2014 boundaries prior to the illegal annexation of Crimea) militarily. He thought it would make more sense to hold Russian assets until they can be used to negotiate with Russia after military stalemate. I can’t remember the quote exactly, but it was something to the effect of “they don’t need money now, they need ammo. They should save the money to negotiate later.”

I am still pulling for Ukraine to get what they need to win, and for regime change in Russia, but I can also see his point about holding back some cards. Of course, money can buy some ammo, but US & NATO countries can probably deliver better than what Ukraine can buy.
I listened to that podcast as well. Klein and Haass seemed to agree on most of what they discussed. It was disappointing to hear most of their discussion - they painted Ukraine in a substantially weaker position than they actually are and invoked some unfortunate straw man fallacies. But the suggestion of Haass here on holding Russian assets might have some merit for the reasons you noted.
 
Switzerland giving Ukraine a nice treat, in the form of +7 Billion $.
As much as I’m annoyed by our US govt acting the way they are towards Ukraine, it’s good to see some other countries step up.
 
re the Swiss Senate’s action:

The referenced article makes clear that, although the lower chamber earlier had approved this action, it is not a done deal:

“For the time being, the ruling only allows the government to find a way in international law to allow the Swiss assets of the aggressor country to be transferred to the attacked country.”

I am going to suggest that either

1) the translation into English was sloppy so that the verb “find” should have been “looked for”,

Or

2) The article’s author and editor were sloppy in their writing/reviewing.

That is, “find” simply does not make sense.
 

Macron Ready to Send Troops to Ukraine if Russia Approaches Kyiv or Odesa

by Kyiv Post | March 8, 2024, 12:34 pm

French President Emmanuel Macron met with parliamentary parties on Thursday. During the meeting Macron said he was open to the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, as announced by, according to French newspaper L’Independant.

[...] “Macron [allegedly] referenced a scenario that could lead to intervention [of French troops]: the advancement of the front towards Odesa or Kyiv.” [...


 

Macron Ready to Send Troops to Ukraine if Russia Approaches Kyiv or Odesa

by Kyiv Post | March 8, 2024, 12:34 pm

French President Emmanuel Macron met with parliamentary parties on Thursday. During the meeting Macron said he was open to the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, as announced by, according to French newspaper L’Independant.

[...] “Macron [allegedly] referenced a scenario that could lead to intervention [of French troops]: the advancement of the front towards Odesa or Kyiv.” [...



IMG_1967.jpeg


 

According to that article, the Baltic countries are are aligned with the French. And Dutch officials has also supported Macron previously.

Also: As long as the "clash" is about how much of a beating the Russian Dictator's occupying forces are going to get – I honestly fail to see any kind of major problem.

More from that article:

"
Warsaw is also shifting position [towards the position held by France]. [My underline.]

"The presence of NATO forces in Ukraine is not unthinkable," [The Polish] Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said on Friday in Poland, adding that he appreciated Macron's initiative, "because it is about [Russian President Vladimir] Putin being afraid, not us being afraid of Putin." [...]

Lithuania's Landsbergis [said]: [...]
"There cannot be any 'buts.' We must draw red lines for Russia, not ourselves. No form of support for Ukraine can be excluded. We need to continue supporting Ukraine wherever it's most needed," he said. [...]

[Dmytro Kuleba Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine:]
"I'm personally fed up with the ... fear of escalation," he said. "Our problem is that we still have people who think of this war in terms of the fear of escalation."
Kuleba continued: "What kind of escalation are you afraid of? What else has to happen to Ukraine for you to understand that this fear is useless? What do you expect Putin to do? 'Well I sent tanks but I did not send the missiles or troops, so maybe you'll be nicer to me than to others?' [...
"
 
The UK continue to double down on UKR winning this war against the Russian Dictator and his occupiers.
Stated here by the UK Defence Secretary Grant Shapps on location in Kyiv in a 30 second video:

I’m in Kyiv to raise the alarm to the democratic world - we must make sure Ukraine wins this war.

The UK has stepped up to do more than ever, with our largest military support package to date. Every nation must now do the same and ensure freedom triumphs over tyranny.


twitter.com/grantshapps/status/1766045325997793488

 
Last edited:

Macron Ready to Send Troops to Ukraine if Russia Approaches Kyiv or Odesa

by Kyiv Post | March 8, 2024, 12:34 pm

French President Emmanuel Macron met with parliamentary parties on Thursday. During the meeting Macron said he was open to the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, as announced by, according to French newspaper L’Independant.

[...] “Macron [allegedly] referenced a scenario that could lead to intervention [of French troops]: the advancement of the front towards Odesa or Kyiv.” [...



If Russia attacks French forces in Ukraine would this trigger article 5?
 
If Russia attacks French forces in Ukraine would this trigger article 5?
No, doesn't apply if member was attacked outside of the member's territory. For example it was not applied to Turkey when they were attacked in Syria (same deal when US troops were attacked in other conflicts).
 
According to that article, the Baltic countries are are aligned with the French. And Dutch officials has also supported Macron previously.

Also: As long as the "clash" is about how much of a beating the Russian Dictator's occupying forces are going to get – I honestly fail to see any kind of major problem.

More from that article:

"
Warsaw is also shifting position [towards the position held by France]. [My underline.]

"The presence of NATO forces in Ukraine is not unthinkable," [The Polish] Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said on Friday in Poland, adding that he appreciated Macron's initiative, "because it is about [Russian President Vladimir] Putin being afraid, not us being afraid of Putin." [...]

Lithuania's Landsbergis [said]: [...]
"There cannot be any 'buts.' We must draw red lines for Russia, not ourselves. No form of support for Ukraine can be excluded. We need to continue supporting Ukraine wherever it's most needed," he said. [...]

[Dmytro Kuleba Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine:]
"I'm personally fed up with the ... fear of escalation," he said. "Our problem is that we still have people who think of this war in terms of the fear of escalation."
Kuleba continued: "What kind of escalation are you afraid of? What else has to happen to Ukraine for you to understand that this fear is useless? What do you expect Putin to do? 'Well I sent tanks but I did not send the missiles or troops, so maybe you'll be nicer to me than to others?' [...
"
It’s hitting home that it is cheaper, in all respects, to fight the fight while its still in Ukraine and not when missiles are destroying your citizens cities and towns.
 
Richard Haass explained a different point of view on Ezra Klein podcast recently. He was of the opinion that Ukraine would not be able to win its objectives (going back to the 2014 boundaries prior to the illegal annexation of Crimea) militarily. He thought it would make more sense to hold Russian assets until they can be used to negotiate with Russia after military stalemate. I can’t remember the quote exactly, but it was something to the effect of “they don’t need money now, they need ammo. They should save the money to negotiate later.”

I am still pulling for Ukraine to get what they need to win, and for regime change in Russia, but I can also see his point about holding back some cards. Of course, money can buy some ammo, but US & NATO countries can probably deliver better than what Ukraine can buy.

I've said before that the war will most likely end in Russia. Russia is taking staggering losses and hiding it from the population is getting more and more difficult to hide.

Putin has been careful to ensure there are no other power centers in Russia. Unlike the breakup of the USSR, where each of the republics that broke away had their own leader when they broke away, the Russian provinces are all run by weak governors appointed from Moscow. There is no internal organization to support the breakup of Russia, but there are many ethnic groups other than ethnic Russians and those ethnic groups have never really liked Moscow.

One thing that is a constant in Russian history, at least over the last 160 years is that there is always some kind of rebellion after they lose a war. Russians are very tolerant of taking high losses to win, but they don't accept taking high losses only to lose.

Russia isn't winning in Ukraine, they are taking huge losses, but aren't losing ground. Whether it can be seen as a loss or not is a gray area, but I think more and more Russians are beginning to see it that way.

As long as Ukraine and the west can keep up the pressure on Russia, they will break eventually. They can't sustain this level of combat for much longer. Perun's video last week was on the state of affairs in the war. Russia is producing a lot of vehicles right now, but the majority of "produced" vehicles are refurbished vehicles from storage and satellite images show that the storage facilities are getting down to the dregs.

When they run out of vehicles from storage, they will have to start making vehicles from scratch and their production rate will start out at zero until those plants get tooled up to build the vehicles, and they will have to buy most of the tooling from China. Russia doesn't make the tooling. Most of the tooling they use now is made in Germany and Chinese tooling is inferior. Some tooling may not be available because the Chinese are using German tooling too.

So they have some engineering challenges to figure out how to make new vehicles with the tooling they can get their hands on. What they will be able to make is probably not going to be as good as what they were making before the war.

Once they get the factories retooled, then production will slowly start to ramp. They will never achieve the levels they are at now because building new takes more effort than rehabbing old equipment.

So Russia is at peak production now, and they are looking at a cliff when they run out of vehicles to rehab, then very little production for a while and eventually back to maybe 1/3 current production by 2028.

They are at max capacity for ammunition production now. They need to build new factories to expand production and that is going slowly.

Meanwhile Europe is working to expand production. Ukraine is going to have a difficult year, but as long as they make the Russians pay a high cost for any ground they take and hold the line, the US will likely be back giving aid next year if not sooner. In 2025 Russia will likely be weaker and with US aid flowing again Ukraine will be stronger.

This war isn't lost, it's just taking longer than people would like.

Macron Ready to Send Troops to Ukraine if Russia Approaches Kyiv or Odesa

by Kyiv Post | March 8, 2024, 12:34 pm

French President Emmanuel Macron met with parliamentary parties on Thursday. During the meeting Macron said he was open to the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, as announced by, according to French newspaper L’Independant.

[...] “Macron [allegedly] referenced a scenario that could lead to intervention [of French troops]: the advancement of the front towards Odesa or Kyiv.” [...



I note that there is an "if" in that headline. Russia is unlikely to approach Kyiv or Odesa. That leaves this whole thing in the realm of shadow play and political theater. Macron is threatening Moscow with a threat he doesn't believe he will ever need to carry out.
 
No, doesn't apply if member was attacked outside of the member's territory. For example it was not applied to Turkey when they were attacked in Syria (same deal when US troops were attacked in other conflicts).
What if Ukraine grants some conveniently placed and shaped territory as an Embassy (making it legally French territory, in theory) right in the line of advance without giving Russia time to communicate the change before the Russian units cross into it, would that trigger it?

Actually come to think of it, with how hard they've tried to hit Kyiv, how have they not hit anyone's Embassy yet by pure chance?
 
What if Ukraine grants some conveniently placed and shaped territory as an Embassy (making it legally French territory, in theory) right in the line of advance without giving Russia time to communicate the change before the Russian units cross into it, would that trigger it?

Actually come to think of it, with how hard they've tried to hit Kyiv, how have they not hit anyone's Embassy yet by pure chance?

A bit stretching. There are embassy incidents all over the world quite often which don't trigger article.

It would be simpler if Ukraine simply complied with requirements (corruption, democracy, etc.) to join Nato and EU.

But again, I think war of attrition is better than actually stopping the war with full nato force, because if the war is stopped, russia will retain its size and rebuild for the next bigger war. So any means of stopping the war quickly is not good for the long run. The best option is to erode Russia while rebuilding the western defence (including Ukraine). This process should lead to either Russia dissolving (balkanization) or the west becoming formidable enough force for Russia to abstain for the foreseeable future.
 
Last edited:
It would be simpler if Ukraine simply complied with requirements (corruption, democracy, etc.) to join Nato and EU.
This is an incredibly simple statement which belies the work required. It seems they are heading in the right direction but it has been generations to get to where they are and it will likely take some time to get to where they (and we) would ideally like them to be provided they get the chance. Best to focus on giving them the chance.
 
This is an incredibly simple statement which belies the work required. It seems they are heading in the right direction but it has been generations to get to where they are and it will likely take some time to get to where they (and we) would ideally like them to be provided they get the chance. Best to focus on giving them the chance.
And it should be added that to join NATO, a country must not have ongoing disputes about their territory. This means that Ukraine can only be admitted to NATO after the end of the war. And any territory that they would cease to Russia in piece negotiations would then legally no longer belong to Ukraine. They could not invoke Article 5 later on to re-seize lost territory.
 
We're finally hearing more about the successful Russian cyberattacks on Microsoft's cloud in January and other possibly related cyberattacks on US healthcare clinics and pharmacies. Microsoft is hapless and asking for government assistance. Some pharmacies haven't been able to take new orders in the last couple of weeks. And some healthcare clinics are looking to loans to pay their staff.
 
This is an incredibly simple statement which belies the work required. It seems they are heading in the right direction but it has been generations to get to where they are and it will likely take some time to get to where they (and we) would ideally like them to be provided they get the chance. Best to focus on giving them the chance.

My bad, I forgot /s from that line, but yeah, I see only one realistic option which is to continue the grind.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SwedishAdvocate