nuclear-news

The NATO/Ukraine Defeat in Kursk (and Beyond)

by Gordonhahn, September 14, 2024,  https://gordonhahn.com/2024/09/14/the-nato-ukraine-defeat-in-kursk-and-beyond/

Contrary to the view of Beltway pundits regarding the sunny side or various alleged successes of Ukraine’s Kursk incursion (https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/kursk-offensive-and-future-russia-ukraine-war-%C2%A0-212669), the Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskiy’s newest simulacra attack – substituting a fake reality for the real one – has led to yet another predictable catastrophe in the real world of war and politics.

Zelenskiy’s gambit had no military logic behind it. Its essence was made up of a propagandistic/PR component and perhaps a terrorist element. It was a reckless, desperate last roll of the dice to overturn the playing board which never had a hope of succeeding. Not one of the goals stated by Ukrainian officials was achieved, nor was the unstated, potential goal of seizng the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant achieved. What was ‘achieved’ was a decimation of some of Ukraine’s best remaining men and materiel`. 

Ukrainian officials publicly stated several goals of the operation: (1) to force Moscow to redeploy troops away from Russian forces’ increasingly rapid advance on Pokrovsk and across the Donetsk front; (2) to seize Russian territory to encourage Moscow to negotiate and to trade for the return of Ukrainian lands in peace talks with Moscow; (3) to capture Russian prisoners of war to exchange for Ukrainian prisoners; (4) to create angst in Russia among the elite and population in order to weaken support for the war and/or Putin’s hold on power; and (5) to make Russia feel the pain of death and destruction that Ukraine has been feeling (Zelenskiy alone said this). None of these goals was achieved. 

Regarding the first goal, Ukrainian Armed Forces Commander Gen. Oleksandr Syrskii has acknowledged that the Russian forces did not redeploy from Donetsk to Kursk. The strategy was misconceived from the get-go. The Ukrainians tried to get the Russians to make an obvious mistake: divert forces need for their offensives in Donetsk to the Ukrainians’ mini-salient in Kursk and thereby weaken their offensive force. Ironically, in order to get the Russians to make the mistake of diverting valuable resources from Donetsk to Kursk the Ukrainians had done the same. This led to an acceleration of the Russian advance towards Pokrovsk – a key hub and perhaps the last best barrier hindering the Russian army’s march to the Dnieper.

Regarding the second and third, before the incursion Putin and other Russian officials had repeated their willingness to negotiate, but Kiev refused or ignored each statement. After the incursion, the Russians announced that there will be no talks while Ukrainian forces remain in Kursk and other Russian territories, according to Moscow’s definition (https://ctrana.news/news/471809-v-rf-snova-zajavili-chto-ne-budut-vesti-perehovory-s-ukrainoj.html).

Moreover, as one exiled Ukrainian newspaper Ctrana.news, notes, no Russian is going to give back 18 percent of Ukrainian territory held by Russia in return for 5 percent of Kursk region’s territory. The same paper notes that even prominent Russian liberals, editor-in-chief of the banned Ekh Moskvy Aleksei Venediktov and Yabloko Party leader Grigorii Yavlinskii (who met with Putin weeks back to discuss peace talks), thought negotiations might have begun by year’s end until the Kursk incursion spoiled the mood in the Kremlin (https://uiamp.org/kurskiy-tormoz-kakie-seychas-perspektivy-peregovorov-ukrainy-i-rossii). No talks means there will be no trading for land or prisoners, contrary to Kiev’s goals.

Regarding the fourth goal, there has been no discernible elite or popular demand for a change in Putin’s ‘special operation policy’ (SMO). To the contrary, prominent hardliners and others intensified their clamor for untying the Russian military’s hands and undertaking a full-scale war on Ukraine, and this may explain an escalation in Russian missile attacks. In terms of the population, public opinion surveys demonstrate both continuing popular support for Putin and the mirror opposite effect on its views than that intended by Kiev. Ukrainian forces began their incursion on August 6th, crossing the Ukrainian-Russian border between Sumy, Ukraine and Kursk, Russia. In the Levada Center’s polling in July Putin’s approval rating was 87 percent. In August it fell a mere 2 points to 85 percent (within the margin of error) ((www.levada.ru/2024/08/29/rejtingi-avgusta2024-goda-otsenki-polozheniya-del-v-strane-nastroeniya-respondentov-odobrenie-organov-vlasti-doverie-politikam-i-partiyam/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=newsletter-post-title_81).  

Levada’s polling also shows that after a short period of shock regarding the Kursk incursion, Russian public opinion adapted and is taking in stride. It ranks fifth in the populace’s mind among the most important events since the SMO’s start in February 2022. Concern was largely localized to regions around Kursk, and discontent with performance was directed at the military, border troops, and intelligence services, not the political leadership, no less Putin personally. Levada’s monthly polling on the public mood showed a barely significant jump just above the margin of error. Whereas in July negative feeling was registered among 18 percent, in August it rose to 24 percent. 

However, Levada offered comparative context by noting that this jump pales in significance to the more than doubling (21 to 47 percent) of those admitting to a negative mood in autumn 2022, when the Putin government announced a mobilization of new soldiers for the SMO (www.levada.ru/2024/09/03/privychnaya-trevoga-chto-dumayut-rossiyane-o-nastuplenii-vsu-v-kurskoj-oblasti/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=newsletter-post-title_81 and www.levada.ru/2024/08/30/konflikt-s-ukrainoj-i-napadenie-na-kurskuyu-oblast-osnovnye-pokazateli-v-avguste-2024-goda/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=newsletter-post-title_81). Support for the SMO strengthened in the wake of the Kursk invasion as of August. Support for the military’s war efforts slightly increased (78 percent), and the percentage of those who supported continuing the war without peace negotiations and of those who supported beginning talks shifted from 58 percent and 34 percent, respectively, to 49 percent and 41 percent, respectively. (www.levada.ru/2024/09/03/privychnaya-trevoga-chto-dumayut-rossiyane-o-nastuplenii-vsu-v-kurskoj-oblasti/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=newsletter-post-title_81).

The only way the Kursk incursion could spark greater discomfort with the SMO and Putin’s course would be if a second mobilization is undertaken in response, since this was the most alarming event for Russians since the SMO began, according to Levada’s surveys (www.levada.ru/2024/08/30/konflikt-s-ukrainoj-i-napadenie-na-kurskuyu-oblast-osnovnye-pokazateli-v-avguste-2024-goda/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=newsletter-post-title_81).

Regarding the Ukrainians’ goal of making Russians feel their pain, as noted above the pain has been limited and adjusted to by Russians. Moreover, if there was pain it was in response to Ukrainian brutality broadcast on Russian media and it has led, as noted above, to greater support for continuing the SMO or upgrading it to full-scale war, which so far Putin has resisted. Thus, among those in the already noted Levada opinion survey who expressed concern about Ukraine’s Kursk invasion, the second-most frequently expressed concern (25 percent) was outrage over the cruelty of the Ukrainian troops in relation to Russian civilians as conveyed by Russian media (www.levada.ru/2024/09/03/privychnaya-trevoga-chto-dumayut-rossiyane-o-nastuplenii-vsu-v-kurskoj-oblasti/). This, as noted in Levada surveys noted above, and the fact of the incursion itself apparently provoked outrage that only increased the desire among Russians to continue the war and decreased the number of those preferring to start peace talks.

In regard to the Kursk gambit’s unstated and likely real goal of seizing the Kursk NPP and or nuclear weapons storage site in the hope of holding the local population and the Putin government hostage to a possible terrorist attack and/or trading control of the Kursk object(s) for control over the Zaporozhe NPP, now held by the Russians and badly needed to help Ukraine get throught the upcoming winter, given the diminution of the country’s electricity system as a result of Russia’s repeated attacks. So just like the attempts to destroy the Crimean Bridge and the drone attacks on Moscow and St. Petersburg, the effect of this newest Kievan-Western move has been the precise opposite of what was supposedly intended. Moscow and all Russia are even more committed to ‘Putin’s unprovoked war of aggression’ and any ‘unprovoked responses’ the Kremlin may mount.

Worst of all for the bright lights who conjured up this operation in Langley or elsewhere, the war is getting closer to ‘the last Ukrainian.’ The Kursk gambit has led to the destruction of much of Kiev’s best fighters and equipment, and it is likely many of those Ukrainian and other troops who made the incursion will be encircled in short time. At the same time, the Kursk gambit made Russian advances greater along much of the front but especially on the Donetsk and southern Donetsk fronts, which will lead to the more rapid fall of Pokrovsk, Vugledar, and the entire Ukrainian defense effort east of the Dnieper River. And do the Second Ruin of Ukraine continues with Western crocodile tears and calls to keep up the fight in defense of NATO expansion for as long as ‘it’ takes.

September 16, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US, UK to announce expansion of NATO weapons strikes inside Russia

Andre Damon, 11 Sept 24 https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/09/12/lsqq-s12.html

The United States and United Kingdom will imminently announce a major expansion of Ukrainian strikes deep inside Russia using NATO weapons, the Guardian and Politico reported on Wednesday.

The announcement will come just days after Ukraine launched its largest drone barrage deep inside Russian territory on Monday, for the first time killing someone in Moscow and destroying dozens of homes in the capital city of a nuclear-armed state.

The move was discussed between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Minister David Lammy during their meetings with Ukrainian officials in Kiev on Wednesday.

When asked whether “Ukraine needs this long-range capability of striking into Russian territory,” Blinken replied that “we discussed long-range fires” with Ukrainian officials and that it would be further discussed when US President Joe Biden meets UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Washington on Friday.

He continued, “From day one, as you heard me say, we have adjusted and adapted as needs have changed, as the battlefield has changed, and I have no doubt that we will continue to do so as this evolves.”

Regarding the discussions, the Guardian reported, “British government sources indicated that a decision had already been made to allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow cruise missiles on targets inside Russia, although it is not expected to be publicly announced on Friday when Starmer meets Biden in Washington DC.”

When asked on Tuesday about allowing expanded strikes inside Russia, Biden replied, “We’re working that out now.”

Politico cited Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Ben Cardin as saying he “would not be surprised” if the decision had already been made. The report continued, “Wednesday’s joint visit to Kyiv by Blinken and Lammy to meet Zelenskiy would not be taking place had there been no positive decision regarding Storm Shadow, the sources added.”

The news outlet noted, “But it would be considered unnecessarily provocative to make a public announcement about long-range missiles in Kyiv.”

In other words, the announcement will take place in a proverbial “Friday night news dump” to make the fact that NATO weapons will be raining down on Russian cities appear less “provocative” and to keep this development, which threatens to dramatically escalate the war, out of public consciousness.

In a statement on X, Lammy declared, “I am in Kyiv today with @SecBlinken to reiterate our united and ironclad support for Ukraine. We must stand up to Vladimir Putin’s imperialism. Our collective security depends on it.”

Blinken framed the massively provocative action being prepared by the US and UK as a response to an “escalation” by Russia. “And we’ve now seen this action of Russia, Russia acquiring ballistic missiles from Iran, which will further empower their aggression in Ukraine. So if anyone is taking escalatory action, it would appear to be Mr. Putin and Russia,” Blinken said.

On Monday, a group of leading House Republicans published a letter to President Biden calling for the lifting of all remaining restrictions on the use of NATO-provided weapons from Ukraine.

The letter demanded, “We write to urge you to lift the remaining restrictions on Ukraine’s use of U.S.-provided long-range systems, specifically Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), against legitimate military targets deeper inside Russia.”

The letter declared that “concerns about escalation” have been “consistently invalidated since day one of the war.” It asserted, “Neither Ukraine’s use of U.S.-provided weapons in Russia nor its military incursion into Russia’s Kursk region—the first foreign occupation of Russian territory since World War II—has triggered a Russian escalatory response.”

Commenting on the reporting by the Guardian, Russian Senator Aleksey Pushkov wrote on Telegram, “The decision to strike Russian territory is clearly being prepared. … There are too many conversations and hints about it for it to be reversed. Even if it has not been made yet, it looks like it will be a matter of days. The leak via The Guardian is not accidental. Public opinion is being prepared.”

Anatoly Antonov, the Russian Ambassador to the US, declared that Washington “continues to test the limits of our tolerance for hostile steps” and is “paving the way to World War III.”

On Wednesday, former Kremlin adviser Sergey Karaganov gave an interview to the Kommersant daily in which he urged the country to be prepared to use nuclear weapons in response to NATO attacks. “We have allowed the situation to deteriorate to a point when our adversaries believe we will not use nuclear weapons under any circumstances. … Having nuclear weapons without being able to convince your enemies that you are ready to use them is suicide.”

He added, “The main goal of a doctrine should be in convincing all current and future enemies that Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons.” He added, “It’s high time we stated that any massive strikes against our territory give us a right to respond with a nuclear strike.”

The massive escalation of the US-NATO war against Russia forms the backdrop of Wednesday’s presidential debate in which Vice President Kamala Harris pledged that her candidacy would be dedicated to “ensuring we have the most lethal fighting force in the world” in order to defend America’s “standing” in the world.

September 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Biden administration split over Ukraine’s use of US weapons inside Russia

Pentagon and intelligence community caution against deployment of ATACM missiles by Kyiv

Ft.com Felicia Schwartz in Washington, September 11 2024

US President Joe Biden has said he is considering a request by Ukraine to use weapons provided by the US to strike deep inside Russian territory. Biden’s admission on Tuesday comes as his government is split over whether to allow the use of US weapons, with the state department, which is more open to Kyiv’s request, pitted against the Pentagon and the US intelligence community. “We’re working that out right now,” Biden said when asked by reporters whether he would allow Ukraine to use American long-range Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, to target sites inside Russia.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly called for restrictions on western-supplied, long-range weapons to be lifted so his military can strike Russian airfields and missile launchers, as well as the ammunition depots, fuel storage and command and control centres that are critical to Moscow’s war.  Washington in recent months has shifted away from a blanket ban on the use of US-supplied weapons to attack Russian territory, allowing Ukraine to deploy them for defensive strikes. But Zelenskyy is pressing the US and other western countries to permit the use of long-range weaponry deep inside Russia as part of his strategy of increasing the cost of the invasion for President Vladimir Putin.

Antony Blinken, US secretary of state, is travelling to Ukraine this week with UK foreign secretary David Lammy to meet Zelenskyy and discuss his request and show support for their ally. Ahead of the visit, Blinken told a press conference in London “we’ll be listening intently to our Ukrainian partners. We’ll both be reporting back to the [British] prime minister, to President Biden in the coming days.” He added that Biden would discuss the matter with Keir Starmer, the UK prime minister, when he visits Washington on Friday.

The UK has urged the US to grant Ukraine permission to use long-range weapons provided by its western allies deep inside Russia and believes Kyiv should be able to target Russian sites and assets. US sign-off is needed in order for Ukraine to use the Storm Shadow missiles provided by the UK for long-range strikes inside Russia. While the US state department is more receptive to arguments from Ukraine and many of its western allies, the Pentagon and US intelligence community have cautioned against the use of the long-range weapons deep inside Russia.

The latter recently assessed that 90 per cent of Russian aircraft have been relocated to airfields at least 300km away from Ukrainian-controlled territory, outside of the range of ATACMS………………………………………. https://www.ft.com/content/48289996-e1bf-4c3e-befb-031698e89e1b

September 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment