It's an observation often made, here and elsewhere, that the Ukraine-supporting West (as well as Ukraine itself) has many times crossed a large number of Putin's soi-dissant 'Red Lines' [1] since he mounted his inept, failed full-scale invasion of that country exactly four years ago tomorrow. Before and during this string of Putin-prodding acts of lèse-majesté, there was a head of steam building up among the weaker hands that he would respond with nuclear retaliation. Well, he never has - despite waving his wiener in that direction very demonstratively, several times.[2]
Well now. Last week, Ukraine's extremely effective campaign of deep strikes - sometimes very deep - into Mother Russia itself moved into new territory. In the past they've blown up entire ammunition depots (with explosions registering on earthquake detectors); seriously incommoded the Bear's very large petrochemical industry; and made some telling attacks on selected hi-tech armaments manufactories. Not to mention the astounding Operation Spiderweb. Oh, and very probably a handful of assassinations in Moscow.
But last week they excelled themselves:
... a FP-5 Flamingo missile strike against the Russian state-owned Votkinsk Machine Building Plant in Votkinsk, Udmurtia Republic (roughly 1230 kilometers from the international border). The Ukrainian General Staff reported that the Votkinsk Plant produces Yars-series intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine-launched Bulava ballistic missiles (SLBM), 9M723-1 type Iskander-M ballistic missiles, and 9-S-7760 Kinzhal aeroballistic missiles. Russian opposition outlet Astra and a Ukrainian open-source intelligence project reported that the plant also produces Topol-M missile systems and Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBM). Geolocated footage published on February 20 shows smoke rising from the Votkinsk Plant. Udmurtia Republic Governor Aleksandr Brechalov acknowledged that Ukrainian drones struck and damaged an unspecified facility in Udmurtia.
Here's the thing: as part of the sabre-rattling, a couple of years ago Putin updated his public policy on use of nuclear weapons, in a manner designed to convince the West that the threshold for a Russian nuclear response is now quite a bit lower. The new doctrine states that the use of nuclear weapons is possible in the event of the disabling of critical nuclear facilities, or massive attacks that pose such a threat.
So how does he classify last week's attack? If he was looking for an excuse to go nuclear - in the middle of the current "trilateral negotiations" - it rather looks as though he might find one.
I say this simply as an observation. Let's see if we all have further 'observations' in the course of the next days and weeks.
ND
________________
[1] Too many to list them all, but here are some (NOT including the demands that NATO withdraw from the 'new member states' etc etc made before the invasion):
- No Western arms of any kind to be supplied
- No MiG 29s from former E.Bloc countries
- No former USSR tanks ditto
- No weapons whatsoever from Germany
- No HIMARs
- No Patriot missiles
- No Storm Shadows
- No Western tanks
- No F-16s
- No strikes inside Russia
- No Ukrainian counter-offensives into territory already captured
He probably would have included "no 6-month incursions into Kursk" - if he'd imagined for one instant that the Ukrainians were capable of it. (Or given reliable reports by his ever-mendacious military.)
[2] Of course, Xi has told him to wind his nuclear neck in - an injunction that is probably still in force.
Only half the story. As a complement to the Russian/Putin rhetoric, list all the European promises to Ukraine that haven't stopped the demographic destruction of the country.
ReplyDeleteTwo interesting takeaways is that the Starlink disabling seems to have swung things back in Ukraine's favour on the front, for now anyway, and Moscow has less faith in the current Russian capacity for suffering than some commentators do.
ReplyDeleteCH
That mad racist Hitler chap disliked Slavs but the current Uke/Russian bosses seem more efficient at killing them.
ReplyDeleteUnless, perish the thought, that it's mainly non-Slav "Russians" being sent to war. I mean to say, it's surely unthinkable that the socialist Putin is a racist too, isn't it?
Nukes have been used once, when there was no chance of getting one back. That applies to Mr Putin and Mr Trump. Not usable toys.
ReplyDeleteI asked AI what could the West do to seriously squeeze Putin. Lower G7 oil price, grab all the shadow tankers. Put serious financial pressure on banks in China, India and Turkey. After that come fairly useless ideas like seizing frozen assets and blocking technology.
Analysts 'say' Russia's economy could collapse by itself triggering inflation etc etc. Analysts will say anything to please Western politicians who don't want to do anything. Especially if they are paid to scribble.
AI says any serious squeeze on Russia could provoke putting the mockers on Western computer systems and undersea cables. Other than that AI does not have any useful ideas.
Just suppose Mr Putin did use a tactical nuke, just a little one pretty please. Who would retaliate? Squeaky bum time, 'ours are down for maintenance', 'we will have to ask Donald'. Headless chicken time - go back and see if AI has any ideas. Probably time for that serious financial squeeze, before the dust settles.
Sorry to see the seemingly-obligatory "full-scale invasion".
ReplyDeleteTo step back a little, then-Moscow ambassador, then CIA chief Bill Burns pointed out in 2008 that “NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, remains “an emotional and neuralgic issue” for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence, or, some claim, even civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene.”
Now it was six years later that Russia moved to secure Crimea, and fourteen years later on Donbass/Luhansk. Not exactly hasty moves. Now I have no idea how many of your "red lines" are official Kremlin statements, and how many are the product of the huge PR campaign aimed at keeping Ukraine financially and militarily vertical. But it strikes me that one moral of the last twenty years would be that Russia's patience may be great, but not infinite. Is the moral you draw that the West can just keep on escalating?
Stepping back further, while the obvious losers of the war are the two combatants, the other loser is Europe, including the UK, whose economies are almost being overrun by China. We have cut off our energy nose to spite our production face.
The stupidity of US foreign policy (which is the driver of "the West's foreign policies) over the last three decades, first looting Russia, then spurning her friendly overtures, then making an enemy of her and redirecting her energy from Europe to India and the Far East, will I'm sure be a case study in some future Beijing equivalent of a PPE course. Perhaps it's one already.
Biden forced Putin to attack Ukraine?
ReplyDeleteWhat a feekin wuss that Putin must be if the bigger boy made him do it.
Have some balls, Anon. Stand up for your leader! No one Forced him. He wanted to do it. He thought he could do it. In just a few weeks. Another successful land grab. It worked before. The spineless West reeling from Covid and Brexit and weak and divided and oil and gas dependant..what were they going to do? Nothing!
Unfortunately, he was wrong.
The Great Patriotic War has some lessons for those who prepared only for a short, lightning campaign. Against a foe they thought would surrender within weeks.
And..
What a silly argument you make. The West wanted to cripple Russia.
Well, anon. It’s crippled now.
So if the plan all along was to beat up Putin’s dictatorship, then now is the time.
If that was what the CIA Mossad MI5 DGSE wanted all along. Then a mighty kick in the frontiers and the dacha comes down, doesn’t it? A larger NATO right now, than before. Take the entire Ukraine and the puppet states from Putin’s grip. 6,000 T-72s burnt on the battlefield already.. Now is the time, surely?
Be honest, if only with yourself. The Leader went for another bit of territory, and very surprisingly, it didn’t happen.
Now he’s in another Afghanistan of his own making.
All powerful nations do these things.
You can’t fault the logic. A few thousand dead. A few years of sanctions. Loss of income for a bit. Banned from figure skating and such. Who cares?! An entire country gained and occupied. Worth it.
But the execution was abysmal.
So now they are a much less powerful nation. Who cannot even defend their important allies in Syria or Iran.
America made him do it, my arse.
Jog on.
Thank you for your deep insights into Russian motivations and foreign policy.
ReplyDeleteOT but apparently people are buying chips by the gigawatt. Guardian business:
ReplyDelete"AMD will supply six gigawatts’ worth of chips to Meta, starting with one gigawatt of the company’s forthcoming MI450 flagship hardware in the second half of this year, AMD chief executive Lisa Su said."
And each MI450 chip has 432G of memory, which explains why memory prices are currently six times those of two years ago.
Deletehttps://www.nextplatform.com/2025/10/14/oracle-first-in-line-for-amd-altair-mi450-gpus-helios-racks/
OT again, but I was looking at a Visual Capitalist graphic the other day on physical exports and services exports. We don't make so much (no cheap energy) but we're #2 exporters of services. Can this model last in the future AI world?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/feb/24/feedback-loop-no-brake-how-ai-doomsday-report-rattled-markets
https://www.citriniresearch.com/p/2028gic
"The US economy is a white-collar services economy. White-collar workers represented 50% of employment and drove roughly 75% of discretionary consumer spending. The businesses and jobs that AI was chewing up were not tangential to the US economy, they were the US economy."
"NVDA was still posting record revenues. TSM was still running at 95%+ utilization. The hyperscalers were still spending $150-200 billion per quarter on data center capex. Economies that were purely convex to this trend, like Taiwan and Korea, outperformed massively. India was the inverse. The country’s IT services sector exported over $200 billion annually, the single largest contributor to India’s current account surplus and the offset that financed its persistent goods trade deficit. The entire model was built on one value proposition: Indian developers cost a fraction of their American counterparts. But the marginal cost of an AI coding agent had collapsed to, essentially, the cost of electricity. TCS, Infosys and Wipro saw contract cancellations accelerate through 2027. The rupee fell 18% against the dollar in four months as the services surplus that had anchored India’s external accounts evaporated. "
We'll have another post on this stuff later in the week
ReplyDelete