Russian Foreign Policy

cremeegg said:
Regarding our defence, our geographical position is our best defence against all comers except our nearest neighbours, and their imperial ambitions seem to have waned recently.

Our Naval service seems to do good work protecting our fisheries. This is effectively a policing rather than a military role, and should be well resourced in proportion to the needs of that policing role.


These were not installed by Irish interests and are not used by Ireland except in proportion to our size. We have no specific responsibility to protect them just because they run through Irish waters.
Click to expand...
We are part of the EU and have a collective responsibility because of that. More importantly we have built our state finances on getting taxes from MNC's that locate here. If I was the guy in California compiling a risk register for a proposed facility in Ireland our total inability to safeguard any of our critical infrastructure would be at the of the list.

cremeegg said:
I have no responsibility to care for the ESB pole in my garden.
Click to expand...
Yea, 'cause that's the same thing...

cremeegg said:
This is a very important point. The cyber attack on the HSE last year was a warning to us. This is a genuine security concern and we should be developing the capability to defend ourselves in this regard.

In fact I firmly believe the reality of this threat highlights the unreality of military threats against us.
Click to expand...
Russia's attack on the Nord Stream pipeline highlights how vulnerable we are to military threats.
Cyber attacks, destruction of fibreoptic cables and electricity interconnectors are easy and would cripple us. Nobody's talking about an amphibious invasion, though if they sent paratroopers we'd only know they were coming if they left the transponders on in their aircraft.
 
Purple said:
The Orwellian vision of perpetual war being used to justify more centralised power and a lack of democracy is, I think, closer to the mark. The more chaos, the more power can be centralised.

Muslims make up close to 20% of Russia's population (the 8.5% figure usually cited is incorrect because Chechnya and Ingushetia were at war when the last census was taken and so are not part of the total given). Islam has been in Russia since the very start of the religion ( a few decades after Mohamed died) and Islamic Intellectuals were encouraged by Catherine the Great. They are nearly all Sunni and most of them live around Moscow and St. Petersburg.

The populations in the South are relatively small although they can certainly cause problems and yes, they are also predominantly Sunni with many of them being part of the Sufi sect. I find the religious history of the Caucuses and Central Asia in general fascinating.


Yep, but the bigger picture is to ensure there is no gas pipeline to Europe through Syria and general instability in the region.
Click to expand...
Interesting that he allows Muslims but persecuted other religions other than the Russian orthodox, this also applies to Ukrain
 
The gordian knot has been cut and finally NATO countries in concert sending modern main battle tanks to Ukraine, especially the German produced Leopard which in terms of numbers and profile is best fit for Ukraine's needs.

news.sky.com

Blow to Putin as both Germany and US confirm they will send tanks to Ukraine

Kyiv has been pleading for months for Western nations to send tanks to give its forces the firepower and mobility it hopes will break through Russian defensive lines and recapture territory occupied by Russia.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
 
odyssey06 said:
The gordian knot has been cut and finally NATO countries in concert sending modern main battle tanks to Ukraine, especially the German produced Leopard which in terms of numbers and profile is best fit for Ukraine's needs.

news.sky.com

Blow to Putin as both Germany and US confirm they will send tanks to Ukraine

Kyiv has been pleading for months for Western nations to send tanks to give its forces the firepower and mobility it hopes will break through Russian defensive lines and recapture territory occupied by Russia.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
Click to expand...
14? Hmm! For perspective:
Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. Beginning on June 23 between Dubno, Lutsk and Brody in far western Ukraine, six Soviet mechanized corps under Gen. Mikhail Kirponos launched a counter attack into the advancing 1st Panzer Group advancing toward Kiev.

The battle which developed and then concluded on June 30 was a confusing morass that swallowed 2,648 Soviet tanks out of a total force of 5,000 versus some 1,000 German tanks. It’s unclear how many tanks of the 1st Panzer Group were destroyed in the battle, but the force did lose 100 of its tanks during the first two weeks of the war.
Click to expand...
 
Aye, the numbers seem small.

But the German move is as much about unblocking other countries... Ukraine is hoping for 100 from different countries such as Poland, Finland, Spain, Denmark etc. These are in addition to the stocks of older Soviet era tanks so I assume is intended as a spearhead, supported by hundreds of advanced Western recon or support vehicles such as Bradleys, Marders, French AMX-10s.

The Russians don't have so many of their latest modern tanks either.

abcnews.go.com

Ukraine expects to get 100 Leopard 2 tanks from 12 countries, once Germany approves: Senior Ukrainian official

Twelve countries have agreed to supply Ukraine with around 100 Leopard 2 tanks if the German government gives its consent, a senior Ukrainian official told ABC News.
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com
 
I believe this decision will speed up a negotiated solution to the end of the conflict. With Patriot, MBT's and significant number of IFV's Ukraine have significantly increased their ability to maneuver and endure any Russian tactical offensive. If Putin's strategy is attritional warfare, the timeline is significantly extended now. Their ability to hold territorial gains will have reduced significantly.
 
Itchy said:
I believe this decision will speed up a negotiated solution to the end of the conflict. With Patriot, MBT's and significant number of IFV's Ukraine have significantly increased their ability to maneuver and endure any Russian tactical offensive. If Putin's strategy is attritional warfare, the timeline is significantly extended now. Their ability to hold territorial gains will have reduced significantly.
Click to expand...
Hmm, I hope you are right but the timelines may not be quick.

I think Russia may have to suffer defeats in the field first to come to their senses. I don't think the West or Ukraine will want to face into another winter at war. So Ukraine will have this marching season to 'do their worst'.
 
odyssey06 said:
Hmm, I hope you are right but the timelines may not be quick.

I think Russia may have to suffer defeats in the field first to come to their senses. I don't think the West or Ukraine will want to face into another winter at war. So Ukraine will have this marching season to 'do their worst'.
Click to expand...

The timeline is in Putin's gift, as it always has been. They have never been averse to attritional warfare nor do they suffer from the societal response to conflict that would be seen in the west. Obviously demonstrated by Bucha, Izium, Irpin etc.

While the tankie narrative is escalation (see Geoffrey Roberts article in the IT and his ignoble defense of his position on drivetime yesterday), in fact, the stepwise strategy of improving defensive capability is sensible. Putin will have to suffer defeats but that is his nature. He chose this path after all. In any case, I think the West do want a resolution (and the quicker the better) but in the absence of that, the second best option is to keep Russia at bay without getting directly involved. It's sustaining the Ukrainian population in European countries that I think the pressure in the West will come from. And the solution to that, is a safe and secure environment for refugees to return, which the MBT's can deliver.
 
Interesting opinion piece in The Journal from DCU Professor of Politics Donnacha Ó Beacháin:

In what is a classic illustration of the “resource course”, abundant natural assets have inhibited the Kremlin from trying to create a modern diverse economy. The proceeds from selling fossil fuels go directly to the Kremlin’s coffers, liberating Putin from any reliance on domestic or external support.
As a result, it is the regime rather than the average individual that is well-resourced, and when it comes to the quality-of-life Russia lags far behind. The typical Russian man, for example, lives to just 67 years of age, behind Libya, North Korea, Rwanda, Cambodia, and Bangladesh (in Ireland, the figure is 81).

Contemporary Russia is, however, not the Soviet Union; it is arguably a greater threat.
The USSR was a status-quo power in Europe but Putin’s Russia is a revisionist state that seeks to annex its neighbours. And whereas the Communist Party provided a mechanism for transition and a power base that outlived individual leaders there are no comparable institutions in Russia today.

www.thejournal.ie

Donnacha Ó Beacháin: 'Contemporary Russia is not the USSR - it is arguably a greater threat'

DCU Professor of Politics Donnacha Ó Beacháin takes a look at Putin’s state of the nation address.
www.thejournal.ie www.thejournal.ie
 
Once Nikita Khrushchev took over from Stalin the threat of Nuclear War with the USSR effectively died. When Khrushchev bragged in the late 50'd that the Soviet Union was churning out ICBM's like sausages they actually had between 4 and 10 operational missiles of that type. Even by the early 60's they only had around 50.
The USSR was run by a politburo which, after Stalin, had considerable power (they overthrew Khrushchev in an internal coup, replacing him with the much less capable Leonid Brezhnev in 1964). They are no such constraints on Putin and he has a real and capable nuclear capacity.

Russia today is like the Soviet Union under Stalin or the old Russian Empire under a Tsar or Empress.
 
Purple said:
Once Nikita Khrushchev took over from Stalin the threat of Nuclear War with the USSR effectively died. When Khrushchev bragged in the late 50'd that the Soviet Union was churning out ICBM's like sausages they actually had between 4 and 10 operational missiles of that type. Even by the early 60's they only had around 50.
The USSR was run by a politburo which, after Stalin, had considerable power (they overthrew Khrushchev in an internal coup, replacing him with the much less capable Leonid Brezhnev in 1964). They are no such constraints on Putin and he has a real and capable nuclear capacity.

Russia today is like the Soviet Union under Stalin or the old Russian Empire under a Tsar or Empress.
Click to expand...
There was the Able Archer scare though at a time when the USSR were paranoid about a US first strike ... luckily caution prevailed:
www.smithsonianmag.com

The 1983 Military Drill That Nearly Sparked Nuclear War With the Soviets

Fearful that the Able Archer 83 exercise was a cover for a NATO nuclear strike, the U.S.S.R. readied its own weapons for launch
www.smithsonianmag.com www.smithsonianmag.com
 
Last edited:
Latest update from Tom Clonan in the Journal on the current situation especially the fight for Bakhmut

Also outline of a possible Defence pact with Ukraine:
Some NATO sources have indicated that short of NATO membership, a permanent ‘Defence Pact’ might be negotiated with Ukraine – alongside accelerated membership of the European Union. Some have gone so far as to state that some of these measures might be explored or announced at NATO’s annual summit in July of this year.

www.thejournal.ie

Tom Clonan: At a horrendous human cost, Putin is throwing the 'kitchen sink' at Bakhmut

The fall of the city – and its destruction – would be presented as a ‘victory’ for the Kremlin, security analyst Tom Clonan writes.
www.thejournal.ie www.thejournal.ie
 
Finland joining NATO is a major blow for Russia and significantly strengthens the North Atlantic Alliance. The Finns have a large well trained army, 650 Tanks and 1500 artillery pieces. They also have a good track record of fighting the Russians, In the Winter War of 1939-1940 they inflicted almost 5 times as many casualties as they suffered and that time they had a much smaller army with almost no tanks or artillery.
The Gulf of Finland is now encircled by NATO members. It's only 69Km wide and Russia's Baltic Fleet has to sail through it to get into the Atlantic.
Their well equipped modern Airforce can now also provide fast air support to Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia who are under resourced in that area.
 
Purple said:
Finland joining NATO is a major blow for Russia and significantly strengthens the North Atlantic Alliance. The Finns have a large well trained army, 650 Tanks and 1500 artillery pieces. They also have a good track record of fighting the Russians, In the Winter War of 1939-1940 they inflicted almost 5 times as many casualties as they suffered and that time they had a much smaller army with almost no tanks or artillery.
The Gulf of Finland is now encircled by NATO members. It's only 69Km wide and Russia's Baltic Fleet has to sail through it to get into the Atlantic.
Their well equipped modern Airforce can now also provide fast air support to Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia who are under resourced in that area.
Click to expand...
And makes an even bigger mockery - if further proof was needed - of the lie that Russia attacked Ukraine to stop it joining NATO.
 
odyssey06 said:
And makes an even bigger mockery - if further proof was needed - of the lie that Russia attacked Ukraine to stop it joining NATO.
Click to expand...
Russia invaded Ukraine to secure a land bridge and water supply to Crimea and to take Ukraine's Gas fields. They have over a trillion cubic metres in the area Russia occupies. If fully developed they could supply all of Europe for decades.
 
Purple said:
Russia invaded Ukraine to secure a land bridge and water supply to Crimea and to take Ukraine's Gas fields. They have over a trillion cubic metres in the area Russia occupies. If fully developed they could supply all of Europe for decades.
Click to expand...
That is a main part of it but also I think they hoped to decapitate the Ukrainian government, and replace it with a puppet and keep all of Ukraine in Russian economic orbit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top