Russian-Ukranian War: Geopolitical Fallout

[Cyrano]

Zelinsly is past his expiry date now. His repeated begging speeches have made people fed up the world over, he has no value in the current scheme of things. AFU's general Zaluzhny is now the flavour of the month. And he has given a long interview to the Economist with Zelinsly present but didn't utter a word that was published. (behind pay wall)

Zaluzhny's demands for hundreds of tanks, SAM systems, artillery, thousands of infantry vehicles etc are eye popping. Just a few weeks ago Ukraine was winning, pushing Russians back and suddenly they have no equipment. And what he is asking for is perhaps more than what all of EU countries have put together.

It looks like the defeat is visible now, Ukr forces getting decimated regularly while Russia is gearing up for a massive offensive sometime in the coming weeks. The ground is being prepared for neocons and Ukr regime to blame it all on lack of equipment. Neocons may very well use this to push for boots on the ground using sunk cost fallacy.

[eklavya]

The Economist:

Briefing: Ukraine's fateful winter
Russia and Ukraine
A fateful winter
KYIV
We interview Volodymyr Zelensky and his top generals about the war’s crucial next phase

Two books stand out in the stacks resting on the desk of Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president. One is a collection of essays on Ukrainian history by Mykhailo Hrushevsky, a 19th-century thinker who helped forge the country’s national identity. The second is “Hitler and Stalin: the Tyrants and the Second World War”, by Laurence Rees, an English historian. The books hint not only at the president’s outlook, but also his changed circumstances.

When The Economist last spoke to Mr Zelensky, in March, the conversation took place in a situation room. He was living in a secret bunker full of instant noodles and a sense of existential peril. Now he is back in his old wood-panelled office in central Kyiv. An Oscar statuette, lent for good luck by Sean Penn, a Hollywood actor, stands on a shelf. Though sandbags and tank traps remain, gone is the adrenalin of those early weeks. Mr Zelensky’s routine typifies the change. At 6am each morning he dons his reading glasses and flicks through 20 or so pages of each book.

Mr Rees’s study of Hitler and Stalin, two men who swallowed swathes of Europe, hints at how Mr Zelensky views Vladimir Putin, his Russian counterpart. Hrushevsky’s writing emphasises the importance of popular forces in Ukrainian history. Mr Zelensky’s war aims reflect both thoughts. “People do not want to compromise on territory,” he says, warning that allowing the conflict to be “frozen” with any Ukrainian land in Russian hands would simply embolden Mr Putin. “And that is why it is very important…to go to our borders from 1991.” That includes not just the territory grabbed by Russia this year, but also Crimea, which it seized and annexed in 2014, and the parts of the Donbas region overrun by Russian proxies at the same time.

In recent days The Economist has interviewed the three men at the crux of Ukraine’s war effort. One is Mr Zelensky. The second is General Valery Zaluzhny, who has served as the country’s top soldier for the past year and a half. The third is Colonel-General Oleksandr Syrsky, the head of Ukraine’s ground forces, who masterminded the defence of Kyiv in the spring and Ukraine’s spectacular counter-offensive in Kharkiv province in September. All three men emphasised that the outcome of the war hinges on the next few months. They are convinced that Russia is readying another big offensive, to begin as soon as January. Whether Ukraine launches a pre-emptive strike of its own or waits to counter-attack, how it garners and distributes its forces, how much ammunition and equipment it amasses in the coming weeks and months—these looming decisions will determine their country’s future.

Ukraine enjoyed a triumphant autumn. General Syrsky’s lightning advance through Kharkiv prompted Mr Putin to appoint a new commander and conscript 300,000 soldiers. So precarious was Russia’s position in October that its generals began discussing nuclear options. In November Ukrainian forces walked into Kherson city. “This is the beginning of the end of the war,” declared Mr Zelensky as he strolled through the newly liberated city. “We are step by step coming to all the temporarily occupied territories.”

But neither General Zaluzhny nor General Syrsky sounds triumphant. One reason is the escalating air war. Russia has been pounding Ukraine’s power stations and grid with drones and missiles almost every week since October, causing long and frequent blackouts (see Europe section). Though Russia is running short of precision-guided missiles, in recent weeks it is thought to have offered Iran fighter jets and helicopters in exchange for thousands of drones and, perhaps, ballistic missiles.

“It seems to me we are on the edge,” warns General Zaluzhny. More big attacks could completely disable the grid. “That is when soldiers’ wives and children start freezing,” he says. “What kind of mood will the fighters be in? Without water, light and heat, can we talk about preparing reserves to keep fighting?” On December 13th American officials said that they were nearing a decision to give Patriot air-defence batteries to Ukraine, which, unlike the systems sent so far, are capable of shooting down ballistic missiles.

A second challenge is the fighting currently under way in Donbas, most notably around the town of Bakhmut. General Syrsky, who arrives at the interview in eastern Ukraine in fatigues, his face puffy from sleep deprivation, says that Russia’s tactics there have changed under the command of Sergei Surovikin, who took charge in October. The Wagner group, a mercenary outfit that is better equipped than Russia’s regular army, fights in the first echelon. Troops from the Russian republic of Chechnya and other regulars are in the rear. But whereas these forces once fought separately, today they co-operate in detachments of 900 soldiers or more, moving largely on foot.

Bakhmut is not an especially strategic location. Although it lies on the road to Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, two biggish cities (see map), Ukraine has several more defensive lines to fall back on in that direction. What is more, Russia lacks the manpower to exploit a breakthrough. The point of its relentless onslaught on Bakhmut, the generals believe, is to pin down or “fix” Ukrainian units so that they cannot be used to bolster offensives in Luhansk province to the north. “Now the enemy is trying to seize the initiative from us,” says General Syrsky. “He is trying to force us to go completely on the defensive.”


Ukraine also faces a renewed threat from Belarus, which began big military exercises in the summer and more recently updated its draft register. On December 3rd Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s defence minister, visited Minsk, the Belarusian capital, to discuss military co-operation. Western officials say that Belarus has probably given too much material support to Russian units to enter the fray itself, but the aim of this activity is probably to fix Ukrainian forces in the north, in case Kyiv is attacked again, and so prevent them from being used in any new offensive.

The third challenge is the most serious. Russia’s mobilisation effort has been widely disparaged, with countless stories of inadequate kit and disgruntled conscripts. Ukraine’s general staff and its Western partners are more wary. “We all know that the quality is poor and that they lack equipment,” says Kusti Salm of Estonia’s defence ministry. “But the fact that they can mobilise so fast is an early-warning dilemma for Ukraine and ultimately for nato.” Schemes run by Britain and the European Union can train around 30,000 Ukrainian troops in 18 months, he says. Russia has been able to conjure up five times as many new soldiers in a fraction of the time.

“Russian mobilisation has worked,” says General Zaluzhny. “A tsar tells them to go to war, and they go to war.” General Syrsky agrees: “The enemy shouldn’t be discounted. They are not weak…and they have very great potential in terms of manpower.” He gives the example of how Russian recruits, equipped only with small arms, successfully slowed down Ukrainian attacks in Kreminna and Svatove in Luhansk province—though the autumn mud helped. Mobilisation has also allowed Russia to rotate its forces on and off the front lines more frequently, he says, allowing them to rest and recuperate. “In this regard, they have an advantage.”

But the main reason Russia has dragooned so many young men, the generals believe, is to go back on the offensive for the first time since its bid to overrun Donbas fizzled out in the summer. “Just as in [the second world war]…some where beyond the Urals they are preparing new resources,” says General Zaluzhny, referring to the Soviet decision to move the defence industry east, beyond the range of Nazi bombers. “They are 100% being prepared.” A major Russian attack could come “in February, at best in March and at worst at the end of January”, he says. And it could come anywhere, he warns: in Donbas, where Mr Putin is eager to capture the remainder of Donetsk province; in the south, towards the city of Dnipro; even towards Kyiv itself. In fact a fresh assault on the capital is inevitable, he reckons: “I have no doubt they will have another go at Kyiv.”

That means that the war has become a race to re-arm. For Ukraine, that sets up a painful trade-off between the present and the future. Fighting will slow down over winter, but it will not stop. A rocket attack on barracks used by the Wagner group in the city of Melitopol on December 10th was a reminder of how Ukraine can use himars launchers supplied by America to wear down Russian forces in the coming months. But in Donbas the war remains one of muddy trenches, relentless shelling and bloody infantry combat.

The temptation is to send in reserves. A wiser strategy is to hold them back. “I know how many combat units I have right now, how many combat units I have to create by the end of the year—and, most important, not to touch them in any way now. No matter how hard it is,” says General Zaluzhny. His agonising decision is redolent of the British commanders who held back Spitfire fighter planes as France suffered a German onslaught in 1940. “May the soldiers in the trenches forgive me,” says General Zaluzhny. “It’s more important to focus on the accumulation of resources right now for the more protracted and heavier battles that may begin next year.”

Ukraine has enough men under arms—more than 700,000 in uniform, in one form or another, of whom more than 200,000 are trained for combat. But materiel is in short supply. Ammunition is crucial, says General Syrsky. “Artillery plays a decisive role in this war,” he notes. “Therefore, everything really depends on the amount of supplies, and this determines the success of the battle in many cases.” General Zaluzhny, who is raising a new army corps, reels off a wishlist. “I know that I can beat this enemy,” he says. “But I need resources. I need 300 tanks, 600-700 ifvs [infantry fighting vehicles], 500 Howitzers.” The incremental arsenal he is seeking is bigger than the total armoured forces of most European armies.

Ukraine’s partners are speeding up efforts to repair and refurbish old and damaged equipment to return it to the field faster, in part by teaching Ukraine to fix it as close to the front lines as possible. They are also accelerating the manufacture of weapons to meet growing demand from Ukraine and their own armed forces.

On December 6th America’s Congress agreed in principle to let the Pentagon buy 864,000 rounds of 155mm artillery shells, more than 12,000 gps-guided Excalibur shells and 106,000 gps-guided gmlrs rockets for himars—theoretically enough to sustain Ukraine’s most intense rate of fire for five months non-stop. But this will be produced over a number of years, not in time for a spring offensive.

Russia has similar problems. It will run out of “fully serviceable” munitions early next year, says an American official, forcing it to use badly maintained stocks and suppliers like North Korea. Its shell shortages are “critical”, said Admiral Tony Radakin, Britain’s defence chief, on September 14th. “Their ability to conduct successful offensive ground operations is rapidly diminishing.” But Mr Putin’s gamble is that he can churn out sub-par shells longer than America and Europe can provide Ukraine with shiny new ones. Ukraine’s allies are struggling to keep it well supplied, acknowledges General Zaluzhny. He recalls telling Admiral Radakin that the British Army fired a million shells in the first world war (in fact Britain fired 1.5m at the Somme alone). “We will lose Europe,” came the reply. “We will have nothing to live on if you fire that many shells.”

Supply also affects strategy. The choices vexing Mr Zelensky and his generals carry an echo of those that arise in every protracted conflict. In 1943, for instance, Germany was on the defensive, but the Allies disagreed over where and when to press their advantage. Britain wanted to strike in Italy and the Mediterranean. America and the Soviet Union preferred an invasion of France. Post-war considerations played a role, too. Britain wanted to attack the Balkans to forestall Soviet domination of the area. Ukraine’s high command is grappling with the same sort of questions today, but from a much more parlous position.

Not out of the woods
Timing is crucial. Feeding in reserves piecemeal is a good way to destroy lots of manpower slowly, much as Russia did in Donbas over the summer. Attack too early and Ukraine will not have enough trained and equipped units. “With this kind of resource I can’t conduct new big operations, even though we are working on one right now,” says General Zaluzhny. But leave it too late, and Russia may strike first, pinning down Ukrainian forces.

Long-term occupation is already poisoning Ukrainian minds, warns Mr Zelensky: “I must admit that this propaganda model of the Kremlin—it works.” Ukrainians in the occupied territories, he says, are like astronauts who cannot take off heavy helmets—limiting what they can see to unrelenting disinformation. “It’s a little scary to see how the de-occupied cities have changed when we go to some of these towns,” he says. A strategy to bleed Russia slowly is therefore off the table. “The main thing is not to be afraid of this enemy,” says General Zaluzhny. “It can be fought, it must be fought today, here and now. And in no way should it be postponed till tomorrow, because there will be problems.”

Another question is where to strike. The most tempting option for Ukraine is to build up a big force to drive south towards the Sea of Azov. That would rupture the “land bridge” of occupied territory that connects Russia to Crimea. Advancing 84km south through Zaporizhia province to Melitopol would suffice, says General Zaluzhny, because it would put himars launchers within range of Russian supply lines to the peninsula, making the enemy’s positions untenable. Ukrainian officials say that this approach was discussed and war-gamed earlier in the year with General Mark Milley, America’s top soldier, and Lieutenant-General Chris Donahue, commander of America’s 18th Airborne Corps, which co-ordinated Western training and equipment for Ukraine until recently.

Ukraine ruled out an offensive in Zaporizhia province in the summer, preferring to focus on the city of Kherson because of a lack of resources. Such an attack would have other drawbacks, too. Russia has strengthened its position in the south since November, digging new trenches, building multiple lines of defence and redeploying forces that retreated from Kherson that month. It is also the most predictable course of action.

“All of our successes are due to the fact that we never go head-on,” notes General Syrsky. His gains in Kharkiv owed much to deception and surprise. During the Kherson offensive, commanders were told to plan diversionary action. That drew his attention to weak points in the Russian line around Izyum. He collected reserves by withdrawing individual battalions from different brigades, and assembling them quietly without being spotted. Repeating that trick might require identifying Russian vulnerabilities in less strategic parts of the front, such as around Svatove or south of Donetsk. Another option is to conduct big raids: quick thrusts intended to harass, damage and destroy, rather than hold ground. “There is an antidote for every poison,” notes General Syrsky.

The military choices—spring or summer, Zaporizhia or Donbas—depend on many factors, from supplies of Western arms, to weather, to Russia’s own choices. Perhaps most important, it depends on Ukraine’s strategy to end the war. Mr Zelensky insists that the only way to conclude it is a complete Russian retreat, both from land seized this year and from territory occupied since 2014. “The only difference I talk about is the one between us driving them out or them withdrawing,” says Mr Zelensky. “If he [Mr Putin] now withdraws to the 1991 borders then the possible path of diplomats will begin. That is who can really turn the war from a military path to a diplomatic one. Only he can do it.”

In private, however, Ukrainian and Western officials admit there may be other outcomes. “We can and should take a lot more territory,” General Zaluzhny insists. But he obliquely acknowledges the possibility that Russian advances might prove stronger than expected, or Ukrainian ones weaker, by saying, “It is not yet time to appeal to Ukrainian soldiers in the way that Mannerheim appealed to Finnish soldiers.” He is referring to a speech which Finland’s top general delivered to troops in 1940 after a harsh peace deal which ceded land to the Soviet Union.

Even steady Ukrainian advances are likely to culminate in diplomacy. Some Ukrainian generals think that the aim of an offensive should not just be liberating territory, but doing so in a way that induces Mr Putin to cut a deal. A European official familiar with Ukrainian planning says that the ideal operation would be one that persuaded Mr Putin that the war was unwinnable, and that prolonging it would risk even his pre-war holdings—Crimea and a third of Donbas. Like all coercive strategies, such an attack would rely on restraint as much as aggression, by threatening Crimea, but also possibly forgoing it.

Indeed, as Ukraine advances, its partners may worry increasingly about the risk of nuclear escalation and limit their support accordingly. On December 5th Antony Blinken, America’s secretary of state, said that America’s goal was to give Ukraine the means to “take back territory that’s been seized from it since February 24th”.

But a war which revolves around Ukraine’s identity as much as its territory—indeed one which has forged that identity anew, far more strongly than before—has unleashed forces beyond the control of even Mr Zelensky, perhaps the most popular leader in the world today. Over 95% of his citizens want to liberate the entirety of Ukraine, he notes. Hatred of Russia runs deep. “It is a tragedy for families who lost children…That’s why people hate. They don’t want compromises.”

To read more of our conversations with Mr Zelensky, General Zaluzhny and General Syrsky go to economist.com/zelensky-transcript, economist.com/zaluzhny-transcript and economist.com/syrsky-interview

[IndraD]

Z asks Sunak to keep supporting Ukraine after Rishi Sunak 'orders Goldman Sachs-style audit of how UK supplies are used in Ukraine war'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... mailonline

[Haresh]

I used the search phrase
"american senators buying shares in defence sector"

Now we know why they are always at war.

https://www.google.com/search?q=america ... e&ie=UTF-8

[chanakyaa]

I'm going to pretend that the title of the thread also has the words "Geoeconomics Fallout"

Multiple sources are pointing to inevitable and a seismic shift in the economic operating model (#debt #currency #gold) of the world as we know it (at the scale of Bretton Woods type agreements), starting in 2023... Ukraine fallout definitely a part and parcel of this shift. Ankit Shah has a dramatic take on this. In summary India will be huge beneficiary of this...in fact, it would be in driver's seat.

Sri Lanka to use Indian rupee for international trade, more countries aim to follow

[nandakumar]

I'm going to pretend that the title of the thread also has the words "Geoeconomics Fallout"

Multiple sources are pointing to inevitable and a seismic shift in the economic operating model (#debt #currency #gold) of the world as we know it (at the scale of Bretton Woods type agreements), starting in 2023... Ukraine fallout definitely a part and parcel of this shift. Ankit Shah has a dramatic take on this. In summary India will be huge beneficiary of this...in fact, it would be in driver's seat.

Sri Lanka to use Indian rupee for international trade, more countries aim to follow

The commentator's analysis may turn out to be right in the end. But currently the hard numbers are not bearing out his assertion. The latest RBI data shows its bullion holdings of $40 billion is a mere 8% of total foreign exchange reserves. It has marginally gone up from 6% in 5 years time. What is the basis for the claim that we are cleaning out the world's stock of bullion?

[Cyrano]

What about private gold purchases? Indian households own the largest amount of gold in the world and gold remains a key investment choice for most people across strata. With increased prosperity since 3 decades, Indians must have bought lots of gold, way beyond what RBI buys.

[Manish_P]

What about private gold purchases? Indian households own the largest amount of gold in the world and gold remains a key investment choice for most people across strata. With increased prosperity since 3 decades, Indians must have bought lots of gold, way beyond what RBI buys.

Most Indians, almost with exception, are loathe to give correct info about the gold they own. I have been to many weddings where i have seen husbands express clueless surprise about the jewelry sported/flaunted by their wives of many years

This is a very very conservative estimate.

Indian households have stocked up to 25,000 tonnes of gold: World Gold Council

Indian households may have accumulated up to 25,000 tonnes of gold, thereby retaining the tag of the world's largest holders of the metal, according to the World Gold Council (WGC).

"We conducted a study two years ago and found the household stocks at around 23,000-24,000 tonnes. Now, the stocks may have touched 24,000-25,000 tonnes," Somasundaram PR, managing director (India) of the London-headquartered WGC, told The Financial Express.

[Adrija]

Also, even though his predictions may turn out correct, I am not sure of his fundamental belief that the dollar's reserve currency status is due to gold. Dollar is the world's default currency simply because the US is the largest consumer market on this planet. And any nation which wants to sell in the US market will have to settle for dollars in return

All other big importers (China, Germany, Japan, France, UK, Netherlands, etc) are not consumers but rely on the US at some level

The situation (USD as reserve currency) will not change as long as that underlying fundamental fact remains

IMVVHO and all that of course

[RoyG]

Also, even though his predictions may turn out correct, I am not sure of his fundamental belief that the dollar's reserve currency status is due to gold. Dollar is the world's default currency simply because the US is the largest consumer market on this planet. And any nation which wants to sell in the US market will have to settle for dollars in return

All other big importers (China, Germany, Japan, France, UK, Netherlands, etc) are not consumers but rely on the US at some level

The situation (USD as reserve currency) will not change as long as that underlying fundamental fact remains

IMVVHO and all that of course

NYMEX and IPE. Hydrocarbon invoicing at these two bourse has led to commodities trading to be denominated in US dollar. The US military enforces this arrangement through formal/informal security agreements with GCC. This forces countries to engage in competitive currency devaluation so they can export to US market in exchange for dollar to buy oil/natural gas and industrialize. This is why dollar reserve standing of any central bank is so vital.

So the two pillars of American power are the US military and petrodollar. If one fails the other does as well.

[NRao]

Also, even though his predictions may turn out correct, I am not sure of his fundamental belief that the dollar's reserve currency status is due to gold. Dollar is the world's default currency simply because the US is the largest consumer market on this planet. And any nation which wants to sell in the US market will have to settle for dollars in return

All other big importers (China, Germany, Japan, France, UK, Netherlands, etc) are not consumers but rely on the US at some level

The situation (USD as reserve currency) will not change as long as that underlying fundamental fact remains

IMVVHO and all that of course

Some thoughts:

2 weeks ago, in a YT round table, someone stated that the largest US ****export**** is the USD (not MIC or anything else). There are some at least $30-40 trillion in circulation.

Tom Luongo (of Gold Goats 'n Guns podcast fame) has been saying, since Jan 2022, that Powel (not the US) and Putin have a pact to strip the EU clean. And, his argument has been that increasing US rates attract a lot more of the USD in circulation outside the US, thereby hollowing out EU - the target of both the US/Russia. Go figure. But he has been consistent and his "predictions" have been right!!! Strange. (Note: Biden had not even had the inflation reduction act on the table in the US Congress)

Now, IF SA accepts a non-USD for oil payments, it will put that much USD out of circulation and more than likely migrate to other commodities too - essentially weakening the USD (and increasing the possibility of high inflation in the US). The last time a guy named Saddam wanted Euros he lost his life. When another guy named Ghadafi said oil for a basket of something, Hillary flew to Libya and said "We came, we saw, and he died". That is why there are many talking about a regime change in SA.

[V_Raman]

NRaoji - do you have a Podcast link for that?

[CalvinH]

So the two pillars of American power are the US military and petrodollar. If one fails the other does as well.

American power is based on USD a reserve currency. USD as reserve currency has Petrodollar as a one pillar. The two other pillars are US being the largest consumer and US military prowess.

Pillars reinforce the structure. The structure reinforces the pillars as it gets bigger. This leads to a cyclical growth that we have seen in last 50 years.

[NRao]

@V_Raman,

Will have to dig it out.

@CalvinH,

Actually, guys like Philip Giraldi and William Lind (watch first 20 mins of that YT vid) have made the argument that it is the "deep state" that consumes most of the funds to support their nefarious activities. That the MIC has a very small slice.

And, it is not so much "petrodollars" as much as the total USD (hard currency + digital forms) in circulation. It is just cheaper for nations to use one currency. As an example, after Russia was kicked out of SWIFT, the Russians wanted all gas transactions in Rubble. They accomplished that by having every client have two accounts in Russia: one for USD/Euro and the other for Rubble. They accepted USD and converted it on the open market into Rubble. That conversion however had a cost - I guess the client ate that cost.

However, the issue is with the sheer amount of USD that is floating around. So much so that any time the US Congress prints money someone buys that debt. "Petrodollar" has significance because if the US lets anyone buy oil in any other currency nations will try and use other currencies for trading anything else (and it is starting to happen as we type). IF the use of USD declines then the US has a cost that the US cannot bear. Just too much USD floating - US consumers or anyone cannot afford to absorb all that. Not happening.

[nandakumar]

The real elephant in the room is the relative attractiveness of the US as a destination for international savings. Whether you Colombian drug cartel or a Russian oligarch or a tinpot dictator of an African country your preferred destination is the US and by extension the US dollar. True it may be initially funneled into a Bahamian or a Luxembourg shell company. But the final destination is the US. To get a sense of perspective, the monies received as capital flows into the US in the first two quarters of 2022 at roughly $1.2 trillion is more than the annual trade deficit of US at $800 billion. That is not going to change any time soon.

[bala]

Actually, guys like Philip Giraldi and William Lind (watch first 20 mins of that YT vid) have made the argument that it is the "deep state" that consumes most of the funds to support their nefarious activities. That the MIC has a very small slice.

NRaoji that video is dynamite. At around 17:00 there is mention of India and the East India Company. My contention is that the DeepState operatives were in-charge from the bankster base of Germany (there is mention of the Westphalia model) to ruin India. They (DeepState) worked in various nations like France, Holland, Spain, Portugal, etc and of course the Royalty of England. Germany curiously is the repository of original Stolen Sanskrit texts of India including the Vedas.

[CalvinH]

The real elephant in the room is the relative attractiveness of the US as a destination for international savings.

That is the effect and not a cause. Effect of USD being the global currency of trade and a safe currency. The other advantage of USD being global currency of trade is that its easily available for large transactions.

[CalvinH]

However, the issue is with the sheer amount of USD that is floating around. So much so that any time the US Congress prints money someone buys that debt. "Petrodollar" has significance because if the US lets anyone buy oil in any other currency nations will try and use other currencies for trading anything else (and it is starting to happen as we type). IF the use of USD declines then the US has a cost that the US cannot bear. Just too much USD floating - US consumers or anyone cannot afford to absorb all that. Not happening.

I dont have numbers with me but I am sure oil and gas trade would easily constitute ~30% of trade globally by value. For large nations like India, China and others with little Oil/gas reserves of their own, oil/gas would constitute 20-30% of their imports. Plus barring few nations every nation has to buy oil and gas.

If something that is a mandatory buy, constitutes 30% of any ones import basket by value and is traded in only one currency than that currency will have a very good shot at becoming the most acceptable currency of global trade. It will always be in demand even if its not a global currency.

[Parasu]

https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe ... nt-abroad/

Maya Sandu of Moldova and now Zelenskyy call for the release of Saakashvili who took a few more risks than he should have. Has been languishing in jail in Georgia since his return.

[chetak]

18 out of 42 German Pumas breakdown in an exercise but all our "Blue Label" defense journos will talk about is how MBT Arjun's "torsion bar broke down" and how indigenisation is marring IND defense preparedness

via@DivaJain2·5h

[NRao]

Live, could end soon. A lot of data points of great interest.

[Gyan]

With destruction of EU economy and by extension Euro, now US$ remains the only Reserve currency. Any country May trade in anything (like yuan) but surplus with end up in US treasury as US $

With destruction of Euro, threats of SA to trade in other currencies is not material. yuan surplus will end up in $

Putin and Russia Central Bank (like India) have been very poor in setting up a financial Center like HK, Channel Islands, London city etc. $ will rule

[Gyan]

Anyone has access to recent data about outflow from Euro into USD?

[NRao]

Anyone has access to recent data about outflow from Euro into USD?

Q3: $113 billion
Q2: $71 billion

Germany, UK, and France lost the most, in that order.

There were a few EU nations that gained, but around 3%gains.


Having said that the issues related to "reserve currency" and hollowing out of the EU need to be looked at from a very long-term PoV.

There are a lot of moving parts. Eg:

* Conflicts between India/China, both major members of BRICS
* Putin declares Russia will challenge the West. He has opened an exchange for metals. Still too early to see what impact it will have, but Russia is no longer talking
* Global South is making noise. While Lavrov was warmly welcomed by African nations, Blinken was pretty much chased out of the continent - one nation I am told Blinken was told him on his face to leave either the country or Africa

[NRao]

On a Charvak podcast, from a few days ago, Dhruv Jaishankar claimed that there are US politicians and think tankers that are confident that the world can return to the pre-2008 era of unipolarity.

If true, that could explain the risks the US is taking and some of its weird features like hollowing out the EU.

[RoyG]

On a Charvak podcast, from a few days ago, Dhruv Jaishankar claimed that there are US politicians and think tankers that are confident that the world can return to the pre-2008 era of unipolarity.

If true, that could explain the risks the US is taking and some of its weird features like hollowing out the EU.

In the race to the bottom the US is attempting to finish last.

[dnivas]

I am in awe of how Russia is able to take on pretty much all of NATO and still keep going.

Germany is spending 500 BILLION dollars to prop up citizens. This is up from 430 something billion from 2021. Also spending an additional 200 Billion dollars to maintain energy security.

Other euro countries are going through some deep fiscal cuts to social spending as well.

I can think of no other country who can currently take on the collective west and still keep going. At this rate, by next year, I presume all of Western military stores will be consumed and the BRICS will become the new G7.

I would have never thought that the Euro puppets would castrate themselves before the US pimp but they still keep standing in the cold and offering it out for free. to be honest, I am having a gala time making fun of Shitty britshts, wimpy Germans and some Ukrainians .

[eklavya]

President Zelensky’s address to the US Congress:

[chetak]

the amerikis are behind this initiative.....


and yet the pakis are claiming that the russkis will sell them oil at the same price as they sell to India

Pakistan will supply weapons to Ukraine through European firms & Ukraine will upgrade Pakistan military choppers

Twitter



https://eurasiantimes.com/pakistan-is-s ... f-british/


Pakistan to supply ammunition to Ukraine; likely to get Mi-17 chopper upgrades in return

[Roop]

I am in awe of how Russia is able to take on pretty much all of NATO and still keep going.

... I can think of no other country who can currently take on the collective west and still keep going.

I have to agree with you. I was thinking the same thing myself.

Anyone who gets a chance to do so should read books by Andrei Martyanov (a Russian author of books on military/strategic affairs of US and Russia). You can find his works on Amazon (either hardcopy or Kindle). I have a couple of his Kindle books ("Losing Military Supremacy" and "Disintegration") and I have to say I am amazed at the accuracy of his writings. He wrote these books several years ago, long before NATO's Ukraine recklessness, and it seems to me he was very prescient about the delusions and incompetence of American military/strategic thinkers. I thought, at the time I first read his books, that Martyanov was the delusional one, but live events in Ukraine over the past 8 or 9 months have proved him right, IMO. And what Ritter and MacGregor report only confirms Martyanov's opinions, without of course meaning to do that.

[Gyan]

Russia cannot succeed as :-

1. Does not have vibrant Financial structure (Eg HK, London, NY, CI)
2. Military industrial complex unable to ramp up, look at absent UAV swarms
3. No ideology. People support Putin but will not die for him & his oligarchs.
4. No technology push. Nothing like Silicon Valley
5. IT sector also very limited

India needs to turn towards hard towards US (but on its terms)

[Gyan]

Anyone has access to recent data about outflow from Euro into USD?

Q3: $113 billion
Q2: $71 billion

Germany, UK, and France lost the most, in that order.

There were a few EU nations that gained, but around 3%gains.


Having said that the issues related to "reserve currency" and hollowing out of the EU need to be looked at from a very long-term PoV.

There are a lot of moving parts. Eg:

* Conflicts between India/China, both major members of BRICS
* Putin declares Russia will challenge the West. He has opened an exchange for metals. Still too early to see what impact it will have, but Russia is no longer talking
* Global South is making noise. While Lavrov was warmly welcomed by African nations, Blinken was pretty much chased out of the continent - one nation I am told Blinken was told him on his face to leave either the country or Africa

Euro & USD are alive as Export surplus nations are banking it back into EU or USA. But if they lose confidence and decide to use the money to buy things then Euro can collapse pretty quickly. Wonder how EU intends to fill 1 to 1.5 Trillion dollar hole per annum, if war continues ? Sell their mother to China?

Electric cars & Ukraine war will end German economy and EU, Euro with it.

[eklavya]

Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO, in the FT:

Stoltenberg: Putin is getting the opposite of what he wanted — more Nato, not less

By Jens Stoltenberg

The writer is secretary-general of Nato

The year 2022 has been the most challenging for European security since the second world war. It has also been an extraordinarily painful year for the people of Ukraine. For President Vladimir Putin, it has been a year of dismal failure. He made two big strategic mistakes when he launched his brutal full-fledged invasion.

First, Putin underestimated Ukraine. He thought he could take Kyiv and decapitate the government within days. Ten months on, the Ukrainian people, armed forces and leadership continue to defend their homeland with skill, courage and determination that have inspired the world. Tens of thousands of Russian troops have been injured or killed. Around 1mn people have left Russia since the start of the year, many to avoid being conscripted for a war they do not believe in. This war of choice has left Russia poorer and more isolated than for decades.

Putin’s other mistake was to underestimate Nato unity. He thought he could divide us and deter us from supporting Ukraine. While Nato is not a party to this conflict, allies are more united than ever in providing unprecedented military assistance to support Ukraine’s right to self-defence, which is enshrined in the UN charter, and help it remain a free and democratic country.

This builds on Nato’s longstanding support for Ukraine. Since 2014, the US, UK, Canada and other Nato allies have trained tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers and supported the reform of the armed forces. So when Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February, the Ukrainian armed forces were better led, better trained and better equipped to resist Russia’s renewed aggression.

Since February, allies have supplied Ukraine with advanced air defence systems, weapons, ammunition, fuel, winter uniforms and generators. This makes a difference on the ground every day. Nato is also working with the defence industry, and through our defence planning process, to replenish depleted stocks of weapons and ammunition and massively step up production — for Ukraine and for our own defences.

Putin claimed he wanted less Nato on Russia’s borders. He is getting the opposite — a stronger, larger Nato. After Russia’s illegal seizure of Crimea in 2014, Nato implemented the biggest overhaul of our collective defence in a generation. Now we are further boosting our presence on the eastern flank and the readiness of our forces across the alliance. Finland and Sweden will soon join Nato as full members, a step hard to imagine before Russia’s invasion.

Putin is ending his year of failures with more cruelty against Ukrainian civilians, cities, infrastructure and health facilities. Deliberate attacks on civilians are war crimes and those responsible must be held accountable. Around 12mn people, more than a quarter of Ukraine’s population, have been cut off from energy supplies. Millions of Ukrainians have fled abroad. Many, including children, have been forcibly deported to Russia. Despite Russian denials, Ukraine’s authorities and international experts are investigating many reports that members of Russia’s forces have committed rape, torture and summary executions.

In recent months, Russia’s leaders have mobilised over 200,000 extra troops and shown a willingness to take large numbers of casualties. They seek more weapons and ammunition from other authoritarian regimes, such as Iran. Russia hopes to freeze the war to allow its forces to regroup, rearm and try to launch a renewed offensive. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has proposed to Russia to start withdrawing troops by Christmas as a step to end the conflict, but Moscow has bluntly rejected this. It was Putin who started the war. He can end it today by getting out of Ukraine. Right now, he shows no signs that he is seeking real peace.

Most wars end with negotiations, and Zelenskyy has set out his peace plan. But let us not forget that what happens at the negotiating table is inextricably linked with what happens on the battlefield. We must continue to support Ukraine so that it can prevail as a sovereign, independent state in Europe.

If Putin prevails in Ukraine, the message to Russia — and to other authoritarian regimes — will be that force will get them what they want. This would be a catastrophe for Ukraine. But it would also make the whole world more dangerous, and all of us more vulnerable. So it is in our own security interest to maintain our support for Ukraine this winter, and for as long as it takes.

Nato allies stand strong and united. We will defend every inch of allied territory. And we will stand by Ukraine, for its future and for ours.

Message in bold meant for CPC/PLA no doubt.

[Tanaji]

Eklavyaji, definition of authoritarian depends on the wielder of the term. One can point to many publications from the very same member nations of NATO that have termed Modiji as authoritarian.

[gakakkad]

stoltenberg is a standard issue Euro boor-o-crat. don't expect him to say anything but the official drivel. I doubt "other authoritarian regimes" is at PLA/PRC. Scholz has bend over backwards to placate china. I think it is a very generic statement.

The usual cognitive dissonance about "ukraine victory". Its 15-20% of it's area ,more than half its population and most of its useful infrastructure. If that is victory I wonder what defeat is.
Meaningful existence of the state of Ukraine is not going to be possible regardless of the how things realistically move forwards. The best Ukraine can hope for is to not lose Odessa and thereby not be landlocked .

The Poles have invested a decent amount of manpower and military hardware. I am sure they have gains in Mind. It appears they are as self serving as anyone. I think they ll be more than happy to encroach upon former Polish territory in Western Ukraine. If/When the war comes to an end on russian terms and If I was putin I would play that card and offer lviv and surrounding former Polish territory to the Poles. They ll take it and it ll really piss the Yankee handlers of the pole.

[NRao]

Was it not Stoltenberg that said that a loss to Russia in Ukraine is a loss for NATO? Or was it someone else?

No matter.

Well, Medvedev visited China and actually met Xi (breaking all diplomatic protocols)!!! Putin flies to Belarus for talks with their leader. (I am assuming that the Russians did not trust communications - a very valid concern, they should know how vulnerable such comms are).

What followed was the announcement of increasing the Russian armed forced facing Finland (and the Baltic states).


Meanwhile, EU trade with Russia has **grown** (by 42%) since Feb 24, 2022!!! And, as Putin stated ALL that growth is in favor of Russia - the sanctions do not allow Russia to buy EU products.

The Ruble went from rubble to a very strong Ruble.

We have had van der Layen claim that the Russian economy "is in tatters" and now this character is claiming "For President Vladimir Putin, it has been a year of dismal failure". These colonists (we are the garden, they are the jungles) are fooling their own followers. The earlier their own news outlets speak the truth the better for their populations. Else the rich will get richer and the poor will foot the bill and we will keep quoting van der Layen and Stolt.

Added later:

At the same time, the Global South is wasting precious time too. They are equally at fault for not being more transparent and willing to take higher risks.

[fanne]

Russia cannot succeed as :-

1. Does not have vibrant Financial structure (Eg HK, London, NY, CI)
2. Military industrial complex unable to ramp up, look at absent UAV swarms
3. No ideology. People support Putin but will not die for him & his oligarchs.
4. No technology push. Nothing like Silicon Valley
5. IT sector also very limited

India needs to turn towards hard towards US (but on its terms)

Sorry I have to call out BS when it is staring in your face

[eklavya]

Eklavyaji, definition of authoritarian depends on the wielder of the term. One can point to many publications from the very same member nations of NATO that have termed Modiji as authoritarian.

I think the reference here is to the CPC/PLA threat of using military force against India, Taiwan, Japan, the nations of the South China Sea, etc.

[Cyrano]

Gyan babu, such a display of Agyan ! Do you read this thread at all?!

[Cyrano]

Soltenberg pops up every few days and repeats the same blabber to justify his pathetic existence in his pathetic job.