The war against Ukraine that Russia launched two weeks ago rages on. Russia's hopes of a quick decapitation strike followed by a mopping up campaign that lasted two weeks have evaporated. Is Russia still building up to launch a firepower-based offensive? Or worse?
This post takes over from the prior post in offering updated news and commentary on the war.
Remember, when the USSR had Ukraine, it wanted Eastern Europe for a buffer zone. And when it got that after World War II, it wanted everything east of the Rhine River as a buffer zone. Face it, if the Soviets had gotten the Rhine, they would have wanted Hadrian's Wall. Let's work to stop this process before Russia gets Ukraine to rebuild the USSR's territory.
And if you thought the Russians couldn't sink lower, guess again:
The Kremlin has set informational conditions to blame Ukraine for a Russian-conducted or Russian-fabricated chemical or radiological false-flag attack against civilians as a pretext for further Russian escalation. The Kremlin is likely still evaluating this course of action but is building out the necessary conditions to justify broader violence against civilians.
I had assumed the Russian stories of dirty bombs and chemical/bio preparations were just the usual lies Russia flings out there as a routine matter. Perhaps it is far worse than that.
The ISW summary for Wednesday still shows a general hiatus in the broad offensive from Kiev down to the western front on the Black Sea. Although some attacks are taking place, especially trying to isolate Kiev. And bombarding civilians in Kharkiv and Mariupol. Russia is apparently still reinforcing, reorganizing, and resupplying their forces inside Ukraine:
The Russian military is clearly struggling to mobilize reserve manpower to offset losses and fill out new units. The Kremlin admitted that conscripts have been fighting in Ukraine (in violation of Russian law) for the first time on March 9, although in a customarily bizarre fashion: according to the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin himself discovered that conscripts were operating in Ukraine while he was reviewing a report on the conflict.
Already, 5-6,000 Russian troops KIA in the two weeks of war, according to U.S. sources. Is Russia failing in its effort to organize massive conventional power? Will Russia actually use chemical weapons based on the pretext it is trying to build? And could that be because Russia can't mass the needed ammunition for areas bombardments all across their front to get their offensives moving?
Is this what Russians want Russia to be known for? Not as a modern country, but a barbarian country?
Can Putin get away with doing this? Will Russians really stand for this?
UPDATE: The refugees coming out of Ukraine have been described as the largest refugee crisis since World War II. Let's recall that scale before we are too cavalier about starting a general war in Europe. Let's help Ukraine beat Russia. Ukraine deserves our robust help. Let's also avoid a wider war that destroys Europe and makes China and jihadis smile.
UPDATE: A map:
UPDATE: Putin is reported to have fired 8 top generals and is furious with his intelligence people over war failures and intelligence failures. Huh. So Putin has set a precedent for effing up royally? I'm shocked that the paranoia in Russia hasn't led them to the logical conclusion that China has pushed Russia to strip its Far East of troops to wreck them in Ukraine. Which might come in handy for China if it wants to erase a stain from its "century of humiliation."
UPDATE: This sounds like Belarus won't send his small and weak army into Ukraine to fight at Russia's side: "Belarus leader Alexander Lukashenko told his defence ministry on Thursday that his army must prevent any attack on Russian forces from the rear, the state news agency BelTa said."
UPDATE: The road to Russia's clusterfuck of an invasion plan. Remember, until Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, Ukraine didn't want to join NATO. Russia was mad Ukraine wanted to join the EU.
UPDATE: Assessing Russia's poor performance in the first week. But the war is still young, of course.
UPDATE: Putin tells Russians everything will be fine despite sanctions. Sure:
UPDATE: Former German President Gerhard Schröder is going to Russia? Are we sure he isn't defecting?
UPDATE: Russian forces northwest of Kiev pushed 3 miles closer to Ukraine.
UPDATE: The ISW update. The Russians continue to claw at Ukrainian forces. While Russia has the potential of restoring maneuver warfare or city assault success, so far the Russians show no progress to reorganizing and preparing to do either.
UPDATE: I really don't know why supplying some old Soviet fighter jets from NATO inventories to Ukraine is such a red line compared to the other weapons we send Ukraine. Moscow supplied North Vietnam with plenty of heavy weapons, including fighter jets, when America fought there. We need to worry more about what we are doing to Putin than about what he might do to us. His hands are full with Ukraine right now. Supplying fighters as a threat to European peace pales in comparison to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
UPDATE (Friday):
UPDATE: For the first time, Russia bombed Dnipro.
UPDATE: I listened to George Friedman on a brief podcast. He said Russia has not used its air force because it has no targets for it. Other fires units are adequate. Maybe. And it might relate to my speculation that Russia can't afford to use it. But that explanation doesn't explain failing to carry out a campaign to suppress Ukrainian air defenses and destroy Ukraine's air power. I speculated that perhaps it just wasn't worth the cost to do that, either. Still a mystery.
UPDATE: Russia has invited Middle Easterners to fight for Russia. Sadly, any region that experiences war--and the Middle East has had a lot of that--exports veterans for some time. If there is no economy and no means to reintegrate veterans, they do what they know. Fight.
UPDATE: The imprisoned Russian dissident Alexei Navalny called for more protests inside Russia.
UPDATE: If Russia uses chemical weapons, I assume it will be for killing civilians. Russia's troops may not be trained well enough to operate in a chemical environment if used against troops holding up the Russian offensives. And Russian chemical suits may not have been maintained well enough. Would Russia haul out Soviet-era suits? So the targets may be those cities to induced death and terror. I do wonder if this could be from a lack of usable conventional dumb ammunition. Sheer speculation on my part, of course.
UPDATE: Russia has broken up that 40-mile Russian convoy and its artillery component has deployed for firing missions. The long-expected Russian offensive on Kiev may be close.
UPDATE: Is Zelensky telegraphing a Ukrainian counter-offensive? "'It’s impossible to say how many days we will still need to free our land, but it is possible to say that we will do it because... we have reached a strategic turning point,' he said, without elaborating." I'm biased because I'm looking for indications of this.
UPDATE: I am completely open to the idea that mobile medium- and high-altitude ground-based air defenses are more important to Ukraine than fighter planes. Assuming friends of Ukraine can buy systems Ukraine already uses. But Ukrainian planes in the air are important for Ukrainian air defenses if the only thing is does is keep Russia from shooting at planes for fear of mis-identifying a Russian plane for a Ukrainian plane.
UPDATE: Hmmm: "Russia is preparing a 'terrorist attack' on the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in order to create a 'man-made catastrophe', Ukraine's intelligence services said today. The invading forces would create a 'technological catastrophe' before trying to shift the responsibility on to Kyiv, according to an intelligence update posted online."
UPDATE: Russia needs to be careful about escalation in Ukraine. Putin may think anti-war activists in the West will make that safe. But American media is bizarrely demonizing anything that can be linked to Russia rather than focusing on Putin and his military forces. This isn't your Cold War Democratic media, politicians, and activists. Use of nuclear or chemical weapons could raise a clamor in America and the West to fight Russia--rather than cower in fear.
UPDATE: No offense to Ukraine, who I want to win this war. And not that I think this is beneath Russia. But I'll want Western confirmation: "Ukraine's air force said on Friday Russian aircraft had fired at a Belarusian settlement near the border with Ukraine from Ukrainian air space to try to drag Belarus into Moscow's war on Ukraine."
UPDATE: It turned out to be easy to pull sensitive electronics out of Stinger missiles in order to send them to Ukraine: "Months later, the Pentagon came up with a solution to the problem. By removing several screws, the military was able to withdraw a sensitive item from the missile’s hand-held launcher, opening the way to sending the weapons from U.S. stocks."
UPDATE: Russia doesn't train for urban warfare, believing (wisely, in my opinion) that they should be objectives that fall once enemy military forces are defeated. If Russia is focusing on cities because it can't maneuver on a large scale, Russia's army is in for a rude awakening. As long as defenders have the will and means to fight, even a city turned into rubble is a fortress that will bleed an invading force.
UPDATE: Sunset in Kiev. Russia's daylight larger-scale operations period comes to an end. Will Ukraine substitute mobilized reserves to free up most of the active units holding the Donbas front? Or is Russia's army really incapable of encircling and killing them? I will not assume that.
UPDATE: Is this a basis for ending the war? "Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that he had 'cooled down' about Ukraine's bid to join NATO amid Russia's war with the Eastern European country." Since he said that, I heard him clarify that he's found that NATO will help Ukraine for its own interests without having to be part of NATO. Which might be true enough for the rest of this decade.
UPDATE: Speaking of Russia's 900,000 active-duty troops and 2 million reservists as if they can all be used against Ukraine is not accurate. The vast majority of those active troops are not ground forces. Further, Russian reservists are almost exclusively former soldiers who served in the last 5 years but who don't get any refresher training. They will be out of shape and have forgotten what little they learned in their brief conscripted service. You'd be shocked at how fast I forgot how to operate any of the equipment I learned to use after my honorable discharge despite then serving 2 years in the Individual Ready Reserve.
UPDATE: This is how things could spin out of control as NATO reinforces eastern NATO members while Russia is invading Ukraine: "India said on Friday it had accidentally fired a missile into Pakistan this week because of a "technical malfunction" during routine maintenance, giving its version of events after Pakistan summoned India's envoy to protest." Let's all be calm and professional out there.
UPDATE: I can't say I'm too worried about Russian amphibious operations at this point. Russia went a "bridge too far" around Kiev with an air assault in the opening days of the war. Will Russia risk a port too far? When Ukrainian coastal defenses can focus on a much smaller area to defend around Odessa?
UPDATE: I admire the Ukrainians for their determination. Their ambassador in the UN Security Council referred to the "representative sitting in the Soviet seat." That is, Russia illegally occupies that sear. Heh.
UPDATE: Ukraine thinks Belarus might enter the war after Putin met with Lukashenko. Would the Belarus military do that? Would the people want to join Putin's Viking Funeral ride for Russia?
UPDATE: If Russia encircles Kiev, it will need to repel Ukrainian attacks on that perimeter from the outside even as it tries to drive into the city.
UPDATE: British MOD map:
UPDATE: There are numerous reports of peaceful Ukrainian demonstrations in Russian-occupied territory since Putin ordered the invasion.
UPDATE: The war has already paused as Russia reorganizes and establishes logistics lines. Don't think there can't be a long conventional war.
UPDATE: It sure seems like Russia is using its air force more recently.
UPDATE: That's ominous: "The leaders of Russia and Belarus agreed at a meeting in Moscow earlier today that Russia would supply its smaller neighbour with the most up-to-date military equipment in the near future, the Belarus Belta news agency reported." Although that is probably to replace losses rather than to re-equip prior to fighting. Assuming Russia doesn't need all its production to replace losses. Belarus will lose men because it has a small and crappy army. But cannon fodder to die instead of some Russians will suit Putin just fine.
UPDATE: That's the way it feels reading the news: "The Pentagon on Friday warned that Russian troops are starting to make greater advances toward the capital city of Kyiv as Ukrainian forces continue to fight back against a barrage of missile fire. "
UPDATE: (Saturday): The ISW update from yesterday. Russia continues to try to encircle Kiev. Forces are approaching from the east. Although Russia had to pause to resupply again. Across much of the front the advance is stalled and even the more successful southern front has faltered, with troop morale a problem and supply lines inadequate. Russia is trying to restore offensive power with fresh Belarus troops, Syrian mercenaries, and new Russian reservists. Belarus troops won't be very good. But maybe not much worse than Russian conscripts, as it turns out. Russia may turn to bombardment more, such as at Mariupol and Kharkiv.
A map is at the link. But the front has not changed much. Russia's effort to pull Belarus into the war probably included a Russian air strike inside Belarus pretending to be Ukrainian. Is Lukashenko looking for such an excuse to intervene or was this a Russian attempt to trick Lukashenko?
Also, Ukraine says it is conducting more small counterattacks. Does this telegraph a larger one?
UPDATE: Seriously? NATO will negotiate despite you starting a war in Europe: "The Russian Foreign Ministry said it will not negotiate with Nato, after the military alliance provided Ukraine with weapons, Interfax reports."
UPDATE: As Russia builds up for big firepower-supported offensives, Ukraine should recall a German approach to buy time during World War II. When Germans detected a build up, they build new defense lines beyond range of Soviet artillery. When the Russian assault seemed imminent, they stepped back to the new line. This bought time and saved troops by forcing Russia to move everything they'd built up closer to the new German lines. I'm just still nervous about Ukraine's troops in the far east in the Donbas region.
UPDATE: Russia's build up is going on for a long time. After initial Ukrainian resistance invalidated the 3-day capture of Kiev followed by 11 days of mopping up plan, Russia has apparently been building up logistics to renew the offensive with firepower backing it. I was led to believe that was a matter of a few days. I have to ask, is this more difficult to do than thought? Has pouring more Russian units into Ukraine exacerbated the problem and made the logistics shortfall even worse? Or is Russia finding that it does not have the ammunition and other supplies it needs? Or is the "big push" really imminent?
UPDATE: If Russia is insisting that the current weapons being sent to Ukraine are a problem and subject to Russian attack, why not send jets to Ukraine? Although they might not be the best weapons to send now, and more appropriate for after the war to replace Ukrainian losses.
UPDATE: It is dark in eastern Ukraine again. One day I'll wake up to find the Russian "big push" began in the Ukrainian pre-dawn hours with a short but big bombardment and is well into execution.
UPDATE: To be fair, nobody seems eager to hold Putin responsible: "The Kremlin has reportedly place FSB foreign intelligence chief Sergey Beseda under house arrest with his deputy, British newspaper The Times reported."
UPDATE: Huh. I found this assessment of mine from way back in December when rumors of Russia's plan were reported: "... an attack along much of the border by 50 battalion tactical groups seems to lack a main effort or two that war plans usually include. Can a 'main effort' of confusing and scaring the Ukrainians work? Or would that offensive peter out and grind to a halt on a long front?" Russia initially invaded with 40 BTGs, I believe. Which petered out and ground to a halt on a long front.
UPDATE: I've said it before and I'll say it again. Understanding Russia's paranoia about who controls Ukraine is certainly necessary for dealing with Russia. But "understanding" Russian paranoia should not mean throwing Ukraine's 40 million+ people into slavery under Russian control. NATO did not expand east. NATO was invited east.
UPDATE: If NATO won't provide planes that Ukrainian pilots can fly, could NATO help Ukraine use what they have more effectively? The Ukrainians "'have 56 available to them now, fully operational, and they're only flying them five to 10 hours a day,' the [American senior defense] official said." That's not a lot for the planes.
Clearly Ukraine's planes aren't being flown as much as they could. Is it lack of mission opportunities? If so, more planes won't help Ukraine. But if it is plane availability, could NATO countries provide Ukraine with their spare parts and maintenance equipment? America would still need to give the donor NATO countries American F-16s because the donors would lose their sustainment capabilities for the planes that remain.
UPDATE: The latest ISW update and map. Russian forces active northeast of Kiev but otherwise quiet; Ukrainians forcing Russians to divert units to securing supply lines to units trying to threaten Kiev from east; Mariupol is being bombarded; and the Russians oddly opened a new advance northeast of Kherson. I wonder if the reports of many Ukrainian small counterattacks is Kiev's army trying to get a feel for whether a multi-brigade counteroffensive is in order?
UPDATE (Sunday):
UPDATE: Russia strikes Lviv military base near Polish border. Thirty cruise missiles reportedly used.
UPDATE: Interesting: "According to a report from the Sunday Times, Russian journalist Andrei Soldatov claims that Putin has arrested the head of the Federal Security Service, Sergey Beseda. Fox News has not independently confirmed this." Will this cause enough fear in the intelligence agencies to remove Putin to avoid being the fall guys for his decision to invade Ukraine?
UPDATE: Will Putin establish little "independent" states in the chunks of newly conquered Ukraine? Could this be his Plan B after failing to quickly seize Ukraine?
UPDATE: Russia is bluffing with nuclear hints and threats at the current level of NATO involvement. And the article makes the good point that Russia isn't losing the war. Just winning very slowly and at a much higher cost than anticipated. Still, will Russia wreck its army to win? Or will Russia withdraw, claiming it was "just" conducting a punitive mission and that it achieved its goal of punishing Ukraine. Whether it has or not inflicted more damage on Ukraine than Russia endured. And perhaps leaving behind newly "independent" states carved from Ukrainian territory?
UPDATE: Behind enemy lines: "Crowds have taken to the streets of the southern Ukrainian port city of Kherson to protest its occupation by Russian forces."
UPDATE: Controlling a battlefield is important in a longer war because it allows you to recover and repair lightly damaged or broken down vehicles. If the viral videos of Ukrainian farmers towing away virtually undamaged Russian vehicles reflects reality rather than being clever information war (propaganda), Russia has a problem.
UPDATE: Is this report of Russian use of phosphorous rounds accurate? This is surprisingly accurate: "International law prohibits the use of white phosphorous shells in heavily populated civilian areas, but allows them in open spaces to be used as cover for troops." Drop phosphorous to start the smoke screen quickly and follow with smoke rounds for volume and duration. But phosphorous causes gruesome and persistent burning on human skin. So you aren't even supposed to use it on soldiers as a weapon.
UPDATE: This is an interesting interview: "The initial Russian campaign represents completely irrational force employment and, in many cases, frankly, nonemployment. A host of capabilities sat on the sidelines. ... They were deeply optimistic about their ability to quickly get into the capital and force Zelensky to either flee or surrender."
UPDATE: Another good point from the interview: The "Russian rate of advance in the early part of the war was actually quite fast. A lot of folks tried to paint it as slow, but that wasn’t the case. It was slow relative to completely unrealistic Russian expectations, but Russian forces had actually broken out substantially." I believe I pointed that out in regard to Russia's advance out of Crimea in the early days of the war.
UPDATE: The sun has set in eastern Ukraine to end another day of campaigning.
UPDATE: I'll believe it when I see it: "Russian and Ukrainian officials gave their most upbeat assessments yet of progress in their talks on ending the conflict, suggesting there could be positive results within days."
UPDATE: I still don't know which way this war goes. Russia won't get its short and glorious war that returns Ukraine to the loving embrace of Holy Mother Russia. But other than ruling that out?
1) A settlement to the status quo ante?
2) Ukrainian recognition of the Russian annexation of Crimea and perhaps of Russian-occupied Donbas?
3) A Russian offensive that finally gets in gear and steamrollers the Ukrainians and leads to an insurgency in Russian-occupied Ukraine, whether all of it or parts, depending on how far Russia advances in its success?
4) A Russian collapse of morale like the eastern front in World War I late in the war? That might happen from continued logistics problems and attrition. Or from a successful Ukrainian counter-offensive that collapses part of the Russian line and induces spreading panic.
5) Or even a military coup in Russia that overthrows Putin? Perhaps with popular protests in the street--or not? That might lead to democracy or a military-dominated government that nurtures a stab-in-the-back outlook that blames Putin and his immediate circle alone for the defeat.
I can't predict. Who replaces losses better? Larger Russia or Western-supplied Ukraine?
UPDATE: Signs of good morale plus command and control: "Ukraine’s armed forces are launching counter-attacks against Russian troops in Ukraine’s southern Mykolaiv region and eastern Kharkiv region, Interior Ministry official Vadym Denysenko said today.
UPDATE: I'm not sure how significant this is for the war given that the request was made in anticipation of Ukraine's quick collapse: "Senior U.S. military officials pushed for additional special operations personnel to be sent to Ukraine in the lead up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but the request was denied amid White House fears it could provoke Russia, according to a report." The training would be for insurgent and irregular warfare. Ukraine seems to be doing fine on the latter on Russia's lines of supply.
UPDATE: The ISW update and map. As has been common, there is fighting, bombardment, and death, but little movement of the front lines, as notional as they are for long stretches. Russia only gained ground in the Donbas region. Russia is pulling forces from its contingent defending Armenia and is reaching to the Far East for reinforcements. Is there anything left that isn't crap out there?
UPDATE (Monday): It's a bigger problem now, but the solution is the same:
UPDATE: India may buy Russia's discount oil. I don't mind. We want Russia to have a path out of vassal status under China.
UPDATE: Ukraine has delayed the Russian assault on Kiev. It may begin soon. How much will be bombardment and how much ground forces? Remember, a decision to fight for a city is a decision to destroy it.
UPDATE: I've mentioned this aspect of the maps before (not that I'm unique in that):
The situation maps showing Russian troops in Ukraine are also misleading. Ukraine is a big country and the Russian forces are spread over a large area. Russians don’t control much territory as they concentrate on maintaining control of a few roads using roadblocks, check points and armed escorts for some supply convoys. Most of the time the roads are available to any civilian vehicles. This enables the Ukrainian ambush teams to reach a portion of a road suitable for an ambush, conceal themselves and their vehicles and wait for the approaching convoy. These battles mean Russian troops deeper inside Ukraine are usually short of fuel, ammunition, medical supplies, food and reinforcements.
Much more at the link. I'll add that the Russians aren't as bad as they appear. This may seem odd for me to say given my long record of saying the Russians aren't as good as they try to appear. But Russia is having trouble recovering from a highly flawed plan that assumed a cake walk.
UPDATE: Russia's war strategy of massive firepower that destroys civilian assets ("The use of such firepower against the cities and critical civilian infrastructure looks like Russia's only path to some form of military victory. ... in making a wasteland, Gerasimov’s army will leave a ruined Ukraine behind.") may or may not provide military victory for Russia in Ukraine. But it might actually enable Putin to claim a successful punitive mission to cripple the so-called Ukrainian threat for a generation.
UPDATE: Putin is between a rock and a hard place in his war on Ukraine. He needs to win the war he started despite heavy casualties his army is suffering. But Russians aren't ready to suffer heavy casualties.
UPDATE: China's dilemma with the Russian invasion of Ukraine is compounded by Ukraine's large role in feeding China, if memory serves me. China may ultimately tell its vassal Russia that it is on its own with its adventure in Ukraine.
UPDATE: Some 160 cars were able to carry people out of besieged Mariupol. That is a drop in the bucket. I assume Russia is allowing a trickle to hurt morale and allow hunger and thirst for the rest to continue to undermine the defense of the city.
UPDATE: There is a bipartisan group in Congress pushing for Mig-29s for Ukraine. In general, I'm not in favor of needlessly risking escalation. Keep in mind that Ukraine wants NATO at war with Russia to save them. Understandable, but that isn't in our interest right now. I also think providing the jets are lower priority than helping with ground-based air defense or increasing the sortie rate of the planes Ukraine has. But Ukrainian aircraft do complicate Russian air operations by putting Russian aircraft at risk from Russian air defenses. So I'd like Ukraine to have an air force. And as a force that could quickly concentrate to attack a possible Russian break through somewhere, that's useful, too. [I clarified this entry.]
UPDATE: Oh, I've been meaning to comment on this. The silly so-called McDonald's rule is dead now. Russia and Ukraine had McDonald restaurants. The rule died in 2014 for Russia and Ukraine, of course. But people pretended that wasn't a war. Nobody but Putin denies this is a war. Thomas Friedman came up with that gem. I'm not saying you couldn't drown in a pool of his wisdom. But you would have to be drunk and face down.
UPDATE: I remain worried about Ukrainian army units in eastern Ukraine on the Donbas front getting isolated and destroyed. I'd be much happier if territorial defense units took over to allow the regular formations to go west to take part in the war there. The territorial units could at least disperse to act as insurgents and irregulars behind Russian lines if cut off.
UPDATE: The latest ISW update and map. The lines remain pretty static except for Russian advances in Luhansk. The Russians failed in a bridging effort northwest of Kiev. Otherwise bombardments, small scale actions, and Russian efforts to supply and regroup continue. Russian and Belarusian forces appear to be trying to hold Ukrainian forces in western Ukraine in place.
UPDATE (Tuesday): Is Russia's invasion about ten days from reaching its culminating point because of supply and manpower shortages? A culminating point is the point of an offensive when your offensive power no longer allows you to advance against the enemy. That can come from changes on either side of that equation. I'd mentioned I would expect a Ukrainian counteroffensive on some part of the front when a localized Russian advance culminates.
UPDATE: On the other hand, if Russia can advance to isolate the Ukrainian army units on the Donbas front, the slower pace of Russia's offensive will be forgotten. Ukraine can't afford to lose that part of their army. I've been worried about them. Since I learned they were there. My impression from prior years was that para-military and volunteer units were there rather than regulars. My mistake. And now I think the regular army units need to be replaced on the Donbas front by territorial units that can disperse to conduct irregular and insurgent warfare if isolated. And let the regulars form or join a reserve force.
UPDATE: Interesting: "Russia's defence ministry says it will target Ukrainian defence industry companies in response to what it describes as a Ukrainian ballistic missile attack on the separatist stronghold of Donetsk earlier on Monday." Russia is either preparing for a long war of attrition or it could be a sign that Russia is shifting to a punitive mission. Or maybe Russia will strike industry because it can strike industry.
UPDATE: It looks like Russia will seize planes its airlines lease. Without maintenance, this is more like a hostage situation than a plan to keep the planes flying. I sure wouldn't buy a ticket to fly on one of those planes. How long will Russia's local stocks of spare parts last?
UPDATE: I don't think attacking Ukraine's supply line at Lviv or implied threats to use chemical weapons means Russia is "desperate." It is normal to attack supply lines. And we've known for a while that Russia will need to pound cities to win after failing to get its parade invasion. Russia could just be justifying that. Russia may well get desperate. This isn't it.
UPDATE: I heard that Russia is now flying 200 aircraft sorties per day. That's not a lot given the size of Russia's air force. But the Russian air force is now involved.
UPDATE: Is there friction between Putin and his intelligence services? And is it significant? "For a police state, one of the greatest dangers is when the police start falling out. That may already be happening in Vladimir Putin’s Russia."
UPDATE: Interdiction (via Instapundit): "A group of [Belarus] techies-turned-hackers called the Cyber Partisans are targeting railways carrying Russian troops and exposing a brutal Belarusian regime." I did predict this kind of thing.
UPDATE: Did Russia really experience a "colossal intelligence failure" in assessing the prospects of war with Ukraine? Or was it a Putin failure that refused to hear bad news that prevented accurate foreign intelligence and assessments of his own military from reaching Putin? The answer may determine who pays the price for the failure of the Russian military to rapidly crush Ukraine.
UPDATE: Does this mean the amphibious threat to Odessa is over? "Russian warships [carrying troops] arrived at Berdyansk, an occupied city on the Sea of Azov that is situated near the key port city of Mariupol[.]" And if so, does it mean Ukraine deployed anti-ship missiles or naval mines to make a contested landing too risky?
UPDATE: Contrary to me expectations, Russia is allowing more civilian evacuations from Mariupol.
UPDATE: Russia states its demands: "'Conditions are demilitarization of Ukraine, defensification of Ukraine. No threat which would come from the territory to Russia. No joining NATO,' he added." This sounds like a punitive mission now.
UPDATE: It is dark again in Ukraine without the Russians shifting into high (and bloody) gear for their invasion. When almost all the news is about diplomacy and refugees you know the military aspects are relatively static.
UPDATE: Yes:
The Pentagon says Russian troops continue to make little progress on the ground in Ukraine, 20 days since their invasion began.
But several major cities are suffering heavy bombardment, according to a senior US defence official.
Russia is presumably gearing up to renew their offensive backed by heavy firepower.
UPDATE: I saw a picture of purported Syrian volunteers, one of whom is holding a Z sign with the apparent words "Za Pobeda(?) underneath. Which means "For the victory". That is, supporting victory. Is that what the Z means? Or am I late to the explanation?
NOTE: War updates will continue on this post.
