This is very depressing. I do not understand neither US nor in general the Western European states. Maybe in 30 years, archives will be opened and some explanation will come up? But today, nothing makes sense. Unless the whole plot was to pull NK into the war, so that it loses enough men so that SK is less threatened? Outlandish, but that makes more sense than “there is no consensus on long range”.
The explanation Im going with is what Ive always heard in Washington--fears of escalation and fears of Russian collapse leading to an inability to take tough decisions.
I’m reading Bob Woodward’s book “War” at the moment. It’s clear the US believes Putin will use nuclear weapons if significantly threatened on the battlefield. Indeed they believe Putin came very close to using them earlier in the war.
Also in the book is a statement that no way will Biden be the president gone down in history as presiding when nuclear weapons were first used after 1945.
This is the issue. So long as the US believes this, Putin will outlast the west and win the war.
The only shred of credibility I could give it was the accuracy of the prewar intelligence and Biden’s public confidence in it. I recall concluding Putin was going to do the crazy thing solely because of my confidence in Biden’s confidence.
The shocking reality is that so many intelligent and knowledgeable ppl are assigning zero cost to Putin winning the war. They simply refuse to digest that Putin is fully committed to extermination of Ukrainian nationhood.
The series of rationalizations follows:
1) The problem can be solved by UKR ceding Donnbas & Crimea. This is not appeasement, in fact UKR expecting International borders to hold is a "maximalist demand."
2) The west is responsible for discouraging Putin from using nukes. It's not fair, but reality. After Putin has Eastern UKR, the nuke threat will dissipate - somehow. The speeches Putin gave about Russia reconstituting old empires should be taken seriously but not literally. In any event, any future nuke threat is somebody else's problem to manage.
3) OK, it's starting to look like Putin's appetite is growing. UKR must agree in 2025 to surrender all the territory that Putin annexed by proclamation. NATO membership is a question to be formalized in a safer future. The fault of any weak deal lies with the neocons & Zelensky who could have gotten generous terms in 2022 if they had only taken our advise.
They are not knowledgeable. In fact it is amazing how many people even in the media and politics know so little about Russian imperialism and instead of trying to learn what motivates Putin (not that he hides it - e.g. he lectured Tucker Carlson for half an hour just about that) try to rationalize Putin's actions and ascribe to him what he must be thinking in their view. In many (but far from all) cases it's willful ignorance. I.e. people are afraid to face the truth.
Your take covers a large swath of the "appeasement today, appeasement tomorrow" crowd. Not just a crowd; it's a consensus now even if nobody owns the apt appeasement label. But the Russian experts who can't accept a world where Russia loses a war with Ukraine can't be dismissed as ignorant. There is no objective truth about the consequences of Russia's defeat or political collapse. Smart, informed ppl can get stuck in a mindset that leads to very bad judgments.
But even Russian experts may not understand Russian mentality. There has long been a strong Western counterculture in Russia. Already in mid-19th century you see mentions of "Westerners" and "Slavophiles" in Russian literature. The problem is that not every experts spent significant time among the latter even though they are dominant in Russia. Instead they talk to pleasant people with Western or Western-adjacent mentality and get the impression that Russian elites are well educated and completely rational, and not that much different from Western elites. And they may dismiss any chauvinistic talk as just pandering to the masses. So deep down even some experts may believe that Russia has evolved from the 19th century imperialism and pursues rational goals and objective national interest, so a compromise can be found.
My great hope is that the new Harris administration will replace Biden’s failed policies and Biden’s worthless national security team with something (and somebodies) approaching competency and assertiveness.
I’m used to being disappointed, but I hope nonetheless.
We need to elect her first, and right now it looks scary. Although I wonder whether the polls really reflect the vibes rather than actual changes in support. Response rate in the polls is very low and may well be affected on each side by the mood. So perhaps the things were never really as good as they seemed to be a month ago, and they are not as bad as they look now. Given that Trump's voter have lower propensity to vote, the vibe of Trump's coming victory may actually be bad for him, as it will demotivate many of his voters and motivate Kamala's.
The current poll averages inflate the R numbers by including large number of R slanted polls that are intended to do exactly that and give the impression Don-Old is winning, which he isn’t
Agree with this--which is why I filter out GOP sponsored polls. However even non-GOP ones are starting to show a tightening nationally--and Trump is acting more and more crazy. Its sobering...
It's scary. Although it does not really look like Harris is slipping. In 538 national polls she's just 0.2% below her all time high (although she has slipped in some state polls). It's rather that Trump is consolidating his support. There's still not much indication that he can break through his 47% ceiling. Kamala has much more room to grow. Although it is a bit disturbing that her unfavorable rating increased by 1% since the beginning of the month. Still, it's almost exactly the same as the total of the percentage of voters supporting either Trump, or Stein, or West. And abortion plus better GOTV effort may be worth 3-5%. E.g. Trump is ahead by 2% in Arizona, but can likely voter models be trusted in a state which also holds a referendum on abortion? For the same reason I think Tester is behind by less than the polls show, although he'll need to improve his position for the Montana abortion referendum to save him.
Not too much, but would not happen without significant Democratic enthusiasm. A weak start would have been a reason to panic. So at least a catastrophe did not happen. Anti-Trump coalition is bigger than Trump coalition, but it needs to show up.
Perhaps not. My bias is that high turnout elections are good for Democrats, but it appears that what might actually be happening is that some Republicans who wait until Election Day to vote are voting early now. So, neither good news nor bad news.
We're in a world now where low turnout regularly benefits Dems because of their lock on more educated voters. We see Dems cleaning up in special elections and midterms for instance.
But that doesn't mean that Dems can't win a turnout battle in a crazy presidential year like now. Trump and abortion are causing high turnout of rarely-vote people on both sides. Harris looks like an ideal choice. What I keep hearing from political analysts is they've never seen a more unmeasurable/unpredictable election in their lifetime.
My gut tells me nothing. You probably heard some experts say that Republicans electoral college edge is slipping - Harris could win with a more modest popular vote edge. The only thing I know is conservative media has done a heck of an effective job the past decade. This shouldn't be close.
I wonder if North Korea received food or some other economic aid from Russia. Kim may be desperate. He's taking more and more risks. Giving away millions of shells is not good for him in and of itself, since one of his (few) strategic advantages is his ability to shell Seoul. But sending a large number of troops exposes him to at least three additional risks. 1) They may turn out to be pretty bad at combat and confirm what we now only suspect about the state of North Korean army. 2) Some of them may defect to South Korea. 3) Quite a few of them will probably be captured, and then Ukraine may provide South Korean intelligence officers with access to the POWs (probably in exchange for something). And they may not only gather some intelligence but also persuade some to defect.
My guess is that North Korea got significant amounts of everything Russia could give it--the aid they have and are continuing to give Putin is so significant, Russia had to have made it worthwhile. If Russia had spare food undoubtedly it could have sent it.
Interesting point about the troops--I assume if they defect their families will be put in danger. On the other hand, the captured ones will probably talk.
Combat--considering the basic qualities that are needed in this war for the Russian advances, they should be ok--but this is just a guess
Yes, the families are always in danger. Yet people constantly defect. Even in the DMZ, which is very difficult (I remember a soldier who got shot several times while running across a few years ago). These soldiers will be under more pressure. Soon they will see appalling casualties and realize that they face a rather high risk if they do as they are told. And the alternative is surrender and much better life in South Korea. I'm still not sure Kim has really thought it through. Maybe he's not fully aware of the Russian way of war and the resulting casualties. Or perhaps he's delusional about the quality of his own troops (just like Putin was before February 24). I won't be surprised if he carries out a huge purge of generals after he finds out the truth. I also won't be completely shocked if the generals fully anticipate it and strike first (yes, that will be quite unlikely - but not a complete shock).
Would be nice to think that someone would act against him (and against Putin) however these things actually happen rarely. Would be a first for North Korea.
There's always a first time. For starters, for the first time in half a century or so there's no clear successor. Once again, quite unlikely, but not completely impossible. E.g. it is also possible that on top of everything else, they also have trouble reproducing the Russian technology that they received, and they fear Kim's reaction when he learns about that.
She's way too young and too female. She's not ready for power and won't be for quite a while. If there ever comes a moment the rest of the Nork elite puts the end to the Kim dynasty, it may be soon, if Kim suffers a humiliating military setback in Ukraine on top of wasting millions of shells, i.e. demonstrating poor military readiness AND reducing stockpiles of the most feared Nork munitions (missiles can be intercepted, shells can't - and they can strike Seoul). Combined, of course, with the threat of the mother of all purges. Yes, highly unlikely, but it will the the least unlikely moment.
Kim doesn't care about throwing his troops into the meet grinder any more than Putin does.
I've read that 18 NK soldiers have already gone off and according to UKR. intelligence are being tracked by Russian Intel.
I can't fathom the West doing the same thing that they did with Hitler until it was too late. This Russian/NK pact is a new version of The non-aggression pact between Russia (Soviet Union) and Germany+ the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Of course, he does not care. That does not mean that it will never ever turn badly for him. Nicholas II cared even less than Putin since back then total fertility rate in Russia was 5 or so. Still, it eventually went catastrophically wrong for him.
The possibilities are many and in terms of strategies, the introduction of state-sanctioned foreign fighters adds new levels of complexity. I imagine Europe is taking a wait and see attitude. Surely there have been discussions of sending European troops to aid in combat, more than just Macron's press statements.
All of Ukraine's allies seem to excel at the "wait and see" attitude. Right now, Europeans seem frozen, at least until the US election. If Trump wins--who knows. If Harris wins, they will wait and do what she wants.
The idea which Phillips proposed that North Korea may have improved nuclear weapons delivery systems is terrifying. I live on the west coast.
I didn’t really like the book “Nuclear War: A Scenario”, by Annie Jacobsen, because the way things played out seemed a bit unlikely to me. But, her scenario starts with a surprise launch of a North Korean ballistic missile carrying a nuclear warhead against the U.S.
I’m worried that we may find out that North Korean soldiers are well trained and have high morale. I have no basis for saying this other than having visited Panmunjom and heard the story about the ax-wielding North Korean soldiers who attacked a South Korean tree-cutting squad which was sent into the demilitarized zone.
We may, but there's a big difference between preparing a small contingent for Panmunjom and 12,000 troops. The guards at Lenin's mausoleum were very different from ordinary Soviet soldiers.
That's something that does not scale up well. The Soviets/Russians have long been able to build serviceable spaceships in very small numbers but have never been able to mass produce cars that people actually want to buy. Similarly, Blue Angels tell us absolutely nothing about the skill level of the Navy pilots.
How relevant is actual combat experience in the equation? How much does training contribute to combat effectiveness, assuming the NK troops are used in combat? Are there any military study theories to this type of question?
For starters, they need to be trained to shoot. Otherwise they are almost useless. Training also helps them staying alive. They also need to be taught rudimentary tactics, like taking advantageous positions. NCO's need to be trained a lot more on that. One of the problems I expect the Nork units to have is that soldiers, NCOs and even junior officers show no initiative whatsoever and will always just wait for orders. That's just how Communist armies are organized. As the Great Helmsman said, power derives from the muzzle of a gun. So it's very important for the party leadership to have firm control over those who hold the guns. That means a rigid top-down command structure, with political officers assigned to all commanders down to company level (precisely to make sure the commanders don't do anything they are not explicitly ordered to do).
Thanks, Andrew. Given the items you outline, even well-trained troops with as rigid a command structure as you suggest, in a foreign country with language differences and in actual combat may leave a lot of room for errors and thus, reduce effectiveness. Truly they must wonder why they are in harm's way. Defections seem likely.
Russian authorities detained 18 North Korean soldiers who abandoned their positions in Russia's Kursk Oblast, a military intelligence source told the Kyiv Independent on Oct. 21. …
….After the training, the 18 North Koreans were left in a forest in Kursk Oblast without food and instructions for several days, leading to them abandoning their post to find the Russian command on Oct. 14.
Whenever I look at the maps and the micro-advances, the phrase << inherit the wind >> comes to mind. The destruction is stark. What is the gain? Is it the fight for natural resources? Reports are that many of the Donbas mines have been destroyed or are in disrepair. Yet, there may be more precious resources that do not need infrastructure.
It is somewhat easier to understand Crimea. Having a port that is ice free in that area is of considerable importance. Hmm... Is anything still happening in Crimea?
Noithing will happen in Crimea for now as Ukraine lacks the western long-range strike to run the campaign that they want. The gain for Russia is small amounts of strategically unimportant territory--on the assumption that Trump wins and they get to keep it.
What about the ATACMS and Storm Shadows that are permitted to strike inside occupied Ukraine? Are you saying that those weapons have been cut off too? Is NATO just supplying artillery (and HIMARS) and armour and nothing else? F-16s are not nothing but so far are ineffective.
Bear in mind that Russia leased Sevastopol naval base from Ukraine prior to the war. The lease wasn’t due to expire until 2042. But, yeah, now there is an overland route from Russia to the naval base.
Philips, this seems to be another Zeitenwende. So what should the US and Europe do? The French to deploy their Foreign Legion plus Finnish special forces? Or would be you can use our stuff wherever and however you like?
Not to go back to the Foreign Affairs piece we wrote in April--but I would start putting in place that plan. Starting with European troops in Ukraine to handle air defense against missiles and drones, and forces to do training in ukraine.
Europeans are waiting for someone to take charge. That seems to fall on the US. I would argue that the US, IMHO, is waiting for someone to take charge even though that sounds silly because one would say Biden is in charge. It may take someone in the Baltics, Romania, Poland, or the French Foreign Legion to say, “f—- it”, we’re going in and let the chips fall where they may. I don’t see any other way. Biden is paralyzed with fright and the US is incapable of standing up to Russia like JFK did in 1962.
Back to the bigger picture - it's so appalling that Biden doubles down US support of a genocidal war being waged by Israel, weakening both the US's and Israel's moral standing and support globally. While refusing to adequately support a democratic Ukraine as it is slowly experiencing its own grinding genocide at the hands of a brutal authoritarian Russia/Putin. Thus putting Europe and western democracies in general in some real peril down the line. And now in the latest installment Putin spits in Biden's face by introducing N. Korean troops into the war - i.e. escalating in a major way while continuing to keep Biden cowering with his tried and true nuclear escalating threats. And where is Macron, for god's sake? Why are the European democracies so afraid of stepping up when Washington won't? Am I wrong that this whole crew of "leaders" is lacking one key quality: leadership? Forgive my primal scream. I keep thinking this is how it must have seemed to clear eyed observers in the late '30s.
100% agreed. Biden is waiting til Jan 20/25 when he can run home and hide in Delaware so he can say that Russia didn’t drop a nuclear bomb on my watch. He doesn’t care about the humiliation that follows him.
The fact that Biden is so devoted to Israel and not Ukraine is repulsive. Maybe that will change when Iran gets a nuclear bomb. (I don’t wish for that to happen)
I totally agree with you when you say that introducing N Korean troops to the theatre is like Putin spitting in Biden’s face.
NATO’s humiliation has no limits.
Also, totally agree with “where’s Macron”? Where’s the UK?
And let's not forget the danger of Biden's choice to provide endless military support to Israel in this conflict possibly igniting a catastrophic regional war in the Mideast, one that would surely drag the US in. "Foreign policy chops"?
Going all out to support Israel, including direct US involvement, is the only chance to avoid a catastrophic regional war in the Middle East. The last thing Iran wants is to drag the US in. Biden is absolutely right to raise the stakes for Iran. It will also help a lot with Ukraine, as it will make Saudi Arabia much more open to the idea of lowering oil prices. Make no mistake: almost all Arab countries support Israel (for all practical purposes, Israel is now the true leader of the Arab League). When we talk about "regional war", we really mean Iran (and its proxies) vs. the rest of the region.
I expect no significant changes to the U.S. and Europe's position on Zelensky's plan for victory until after the U.S. presidential election. With a Harris victory there might be some hope that aid to Ukraine will increase. For Europe, regardless of the U.S. outcome, the introduction of North Korean combat troops will most likely put added pressure on the Baltic states to take more drastic measures to support Ukraine and strengthen their own defenses. Their biggest problem, of course, is that they have little "defense in depth". Winter weather and the onset of "rasputitsda" will probably give Ukraine a respite from major actions (unfortunately, that also applies to Russia) and give Europe time to build up their own defense infrastructure. Whether...and to what extent...they will do so remains to be seen because "talk is cheap" and Europe is very good at "talking". It seems likely that the spring of 2025 will be the pivotal time in this war and the West must do all things necessary to ensure a Urainian victory. I confess that I am not as hopeful as I once was in this regard because I see an incredibly short-sighted move towards dis-engagement on the part of certain European states. If Trump wins (may the Gods forbid!) the U.S. will most assuredly reduce, or stop entirely, any further assistance. Then, the best Ukraine can hope for is a stalemate.
Even forceful action by Harris may be too little, too late and will be stymied by the Trumplicans in Congress and possibly lead Trump to encourage fighting in the streets to press isolationism.
I found out why the U.S. often has to be involved in targeting long range strikes.
It’s because Russia is able to jam GPS, and so terrain contour matching systems to guide cruise missiles are important, and apparently the U.S. does not share that mapping data with our partners.
So, the U.S. has to provide the necessary targeting information in order to use the terrain contour matching system to carry out a long range strike.
Ukraine has its own version of this terrain contour following technology for the AQ 400 Scythe drone, which I think is a major reason they are able to conduct successful long range strikes deep inside Russia.
Beyond depressing all round. And gives rise to a much wider more strategic discussion about the virtues of ‘deterrence’. Am I the only one to see that it certainly works - but apparently only against the west? Pretty sure that’s not what was originally intended but that’s where we are.
North Korean troops on the ground in Europe? Go us. What a strategic victory for the west this is turning out to be……..
So the facility pictured above where North Korean troops as staging, that facility has geolocation coordinates. Right now those coordinates are not being utilized, but they can be. That's all I'm going to say for now.
Depressing beyond belief, but we must face the reality. A vengeful willing fools may shortly be President, Ukraine may be wiped off the map by snatching defeat from the jaws of possible victory, Germany and the rest of Europe will accommodate Russian planning, China strangles Taiwan and Saudi Arabia bends the knee to Iran and Israel will face the need to project nuclear strength. It looks like the Western world is on the verge of folding. All the leaders are Neville Chamberlain....
Time for S. Korea to send its intelligence agents - and some troops - to Ukraine. So they can be ready for N Koreans prisoners getting taken - and interrogating them, deprogramming them, recruiting them.
This is very depressing. I do not understand neither US nor in general the Western European states. Maybe in 30 years, archives will be opened and some explanation will come up? But today, nothing makes sense. Unless the whole plot was to pull NK into the war, so that it loses enough men so that SK is less threatened? Outlandish, but that makes more sense than “there is no consensus on long range”.
Poor Ukrainians…
The explanation Im going with is what Ive always heard in Washington--fears of escalation and fears of Russian collapse leading to an inability to take tough decisions.
Yes, it strikes me as high risk aversion, which Putin is able to capitalize on.
I’m reading Bob Woodward’s book “War” at the moment. It’s clear the US believes Putin will use nuclear weapons if significantly threatened on the battlefield. Indeed they believe Putin came very close to using them earlier in the war.
Also in the book is a statement that no way will Biden be the president gone down in history as presiding when nuclear weapons were first used after 1945.
This is the issue. So long as the US believes this, Putin will outlast the west and win the war.
I’d very much like Phillips’ view.
Yeah--the Biden people really pressed the nuclear fear line in the book--the 50% probability mention strikes me as ludicrous.
The frustrating thing is that these probabilities are purely imaginary—driven by the Russians who are experts at psychological warfare.
That’s the huge question looming over the whole western response to the war.
The only shred of credibility I could give it was the accuracy of the prewar intelligence and Biden’s public confidence in it. I recall concluding Putin was going to do the crazy thing solely because of my confidence in Biden’s confidence.
Sorry, my “it” was the 50% bit.
The shocking reality is that so many intelligent and knowledgeable ppl are assigning zero cost to Putin winning the war. They simply refuse to digest that Putin is fully committed to extermination of Ukrainian nationhood.
The series of rationalizations follows:
1) The problem can be solved by UKR ceding Donnbas & Crimea. This is not appeasement, in fact UKR expecting International borders to hold is a "maximalist demand."
2) The west is responsible for discouraging Putin from using nukes. It's not fair, but reality. After Putin has Eastern UKR, the nuke threat will dissipate - somehow. The speeches Putin gave about Russia reconstituting old empires should be taken seriously but not literally. In any event, any future nuke threat is somebody else's problem to manage.
3) OK, it's starting to look like Putin's appetite is growing. UKR must agree in 2025 to surrender all the territory that Putin annexed by proclamation. NATO membership is a question to be formalized in a safer future. The fault of any weak deal lies with the neocons & Zelensky who could have gotten generous terms in 2022 if they had only taken our advise.
They are not knowledgeable. In fact it is amazing how many people even in the media and politics know so little about Russian imperialism and instead of trying to learn what motivates Putin (not that he hides it - e.g. he lectured Tucker Carlson for half an hour just about that) try to rationalize Putin's actions and ascribe to him what he must be thinking in their view. In many (but far from all) cases it's willful ignorance. I.e. people are afraid to face the truth.
Your take covers a large swath of the "appeasement today, appeasement tomorrow" crowd. Not just a crowd; it's a consensus now even if nobody owns the apt appeasement label. But the Russian experts who can't accept a world where Russia loses a war with Ukraine can't be dismissed as ignorant. There is no objective truth about the consequences of Russia's defeat or political collapse. Smart, informed ppl can get stuck in a mindset that leads to very bad judgments.
But even Russian experts may not understand Russian mentality. There has long been a strong Western counterculture in Russia. Already in mid-19th century you see mentions of "Westerners" and "Slavophiles" in Russian literature. The problem is that not every experts spent significant time among the latter even though they are dominant in Russia. Instead they talk to pleasant people with Western or Western-adjacent mentality and get the impression that Russian elites are well educated and completely rational, and not that much different from Western elites. And they may dismiss any chauvinistic talk as just pandering to the masses. So deep down even some experts may believe that Russia has evolved from the 19th century imperialism and pursues rational goals and objective national interest, so a compromise can be found.
My great hope is that the new Harris administration will replace Biden’s failed policies and Biden’s worthless national security team with something (and somebodies) approaching competency and assertiveness.
I’m used to being disappointed, but I hope nonetheless.
We share hopes--thats all I can say!
We need to elect her first, and right now it looks scary. Although I wonder whether the polls really reflect the vibes rather than actual changes in support. Response rate in the polls is very low and may well be affected on each side by the mood. So perhaps the things were never really as good as they seemed to be a month ago, and they are not as bad as they look now. Given that Trump's voter have lower propensity to vote, the vibe of Trump's coming victory may actually be bad for him, as it will demotivate many of his voters and motivate Kamala's.
The current poll averages inflate the R numbers by including large number of R slanted polls that are intended to do exactly that and give the impression Don-Old is winning, which he isn’t
Agree with this--which is why I filter out GOP sponsored polls. However even non-GOP ones are starting to show a tightening nationally--and Trump is acting more and more crazy. Its sobering...
It's scary. Although it does not really look like Harris is slipping. In 538 national polls she's just 0.2% below her all time high (although she has slipped in some state polls). It's rather that Trump is consolidating his support. There's still not much indication that he can break through his 47% ceiling. Kamala has much more room to grow. Although it is a bit disturbing that her unfavorable rating increased by 1% since the beginning of the month. Still, it's almost exactly the same as the total of the percentage of voters supporting either Trump, or Stein, or West. And abortion plus better GOTV effort may be worth 3-5%. E.g. Trump is ahead by 2% in Arizona, but can likely voter models be trusted in a state which also holds a referendum on abortion? For the same reason I think Tester is behind by less than the polls show, although he'll need to improve his position for the Montana abortion referendum to save him.
Early voting in Georgia has set a new record, which is a good sign.
Do you think we can read anything into that?
Not too much, but would not happen without significant Democratic enthusiasm. A weak start would have been a reason to panic. So at least a catastrophe did not happen. Anti-Trump coalition is bigger than Trump coalition, but it needs to show up.
Perhaps not. My bias is that high turnout elections are good for Democrats, but it appears that what might actually be happening is that some Republicans who wait until Election Day to vote are voting early now. So, neither good news nor bad news.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/weeks-early-voting-data-tell-us-democrats-republicans-are-turning-2024-rcna175419
We're in a world now where low turnout regularly benefits Dems because of their lock on more educated voters. We see Dems cleaning up in special elections and midterms for instance.
But that doesn't mean that Dems can't win a turnout battle in a crazy presidential year like now. Trump and abortion are causing high turnout of rarely-vote people on both sides. Harris looks like an ideal choice. What I keep hearing from political analysts is they've never seen a more unmeasurable/unpredictable election in their lifetime.
My gut tells me nothing. You probably heard some experts say that Republicans electoral college edge is slipping - Harris could win with a more modest popular vote edge. The only thing I know is conservative media has done a heck of an effective job the past decade. This shouldn't be close.
NC too.
Everyone in the US who cares about Ukraine needs to get out and vote. Trump is a Putin puppet. This is our only chance.
Yes indeed
I wonder if North Korea received food or some other economic aid from Russia. Kim may be desperate. He's taking more and more risks. Giving away millions of shells is not good for him in and of itself, since one of his (few) strategic advantages is his ability to shell Seoul. But sending a large number of troops exposes him to at least three additional risks. 1) They may turn out to be pretty bad at combat and confirm what we now only suspect about the state of North Korean army. 2) Some of them may defect to South Korea. 3) Quite a few of them will probably be captured, and then Ukraine may provide South Korean intelligence officers with access to the POWs (probably in exchange for something). And they may not only gather some intelligence but also persuade some to defect.
My guess is that North Korea got significant amounts of everything Russia could give it--the aid they have and are continuing to give Putin is so significant, Russia had to have made it worthwhile. If Russia had spare food undoubtedly it could have sent it.
Interesting point about the troops--I assume if they defect their families will be put in danger. On the other hand, the captured ones will probably talk.
Combat--considering the basic qualities that are needed in this war for the Russian advances, they should be ok--but this is just a guess
Yes, the families are always in danger. Yet people constantly defect. Even in the DMZ, which is very difficult (I remember a soldier who got shot several times while running across a few years ago). These soldiers will be under more pressure. Soon they will see appalling casualties and realize that they face a rather high risk if they do as they are told. And the alternative is surrender and much better life in South Korea. I'm still not sure Kim has really thought it through. Maybe he's not fully aware of the Russian way of war and the resulting casualties. Or perhaps he's delusional about the quality of his own troops (just like Putin was before February 24). I won't be surprised if he carries out a huge purge of generals after he finds out the truth. I also won't be completely shocked if the generals fully anticipate it and strike first (yes, that will be quite unlikely - but not a complete shock).
Would be nice to think that someone would act against him (and against Putin) however these things actually happen rarely. Would be a first for North Korea.
There's always a first time. For starters, for the first time in half a century or so there's no clear successor. Once again, quite unlikely, but not completely impossible. E.g. it is also possible that on top of everything else, they also have trouble reproducing the Russian technology that they received, and they fear Kim's reaction when he learns about that.
He is trying to prepare his daughter--but in NK that might not work of course.
She's way too young and too female. She's not ready for power and won't be for quite a while. If there ever comes a moment the rest of the Nork elite puts the end to the Kim dynasty, it may be soon, if Kim suffers a humiliating military setback in Ukraine on top of wasting millions of shells, i.e. demonstrating poor military readiness AND reducing stockpiles of the most feared Nork munitions (missiles can be intercepted, shells can't - and they can strike Seoul). Combined, of course, with the threat of the mother of all purges. Yes, highly unlikely, but it will the the least unlikely moment.
Kim doesn't care about throwing his troops into the meet grinder any more than Putin does.
I've read that 18 NK soldiers have already gone off and according to UKR. intelligence are being tracked by Russian Intel.
I can't fathom the West doing the same thing that they did with Hitler until it was too late. This Russian/NK pact is a new version of The non-aggression pact between Russia (Soviet Union) and Germany+ the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Of course, he does not care. That does not mean that it will never ever turn badly for him. Nicholas II cared even less than Putin since back then total fertility rate in Russia was 5 or so. Still, it eventually went catastrophically wrong for him.
I wonder about the language differences. Now that could make a difference in execution.
Yep--they will have to be commanded by their own officers--which can make coordination with the Russians tricky (unless the officers speak Russian)
The possibilities are many and in terms of strategies, the introduction of state-sanctioned foreign fighters adds new levels of complexity. I imagine Europe is taking a wait and see attitude. Surely there have been discussions of sending European troops to aid in combat, more than just Macron's press statements.
All of Ukraine's allies seem to excel at the "wait and see" attitude. Right now, Europeans seem frozen, at least until the US election. If Trump wins--who knows. If Harris wins, they will wait and do what she wants.
The idea which Phillips proposed that North Korea may have improved nuclear weapons delivery systems is terrifying. I live on the west coast.
I didn’t really like the book “Nuclear War: A Scenario”, by Annie Jacobsen, because the way things played out seemed a bit unlikely to me. But, her scenario starts with a surprise launch of a North Korean ballistic missile carrying a nuclear warhead against the U.S.
Ugh.
I do think what Putin offered had to be significant to get the North Koreans to send so many shells and now soldiers.
I’m worried that we may find out that North Korean soldiers are well trained and have high morale. I have no basis for saying this other than having visited Panmunjom and heard the story about the ax-wielding North Korean soldiers who attacked a South Korean tree-cutting squad which was sent into the demilitarized zone.
We may, but there's a big difference between preparing a small contingent for Panmunjom and 12,000 troops. The guards at Lenin's mausoleum were very different from ordinary Soviet soldiers.
Admittedly, the soldiers at the demilitarized zone were carefully selected.
That's something that does not scale up well. The Soviets/Russians have long been able to build serviceable spaceships in very small numbers but have never been able to mass produce cars that people actually want to buy. Similarly, Blue Angels tell us absolutely nothing about the skill level of the Navy pilots.
How relevant is actual combat experience in the equation? How much does training contribute to combat effectiveness, assuming the NK troops are used in combat? Are there any military study theories to this type of question?
For starters, they need to be trained to shoot. Otherwise they are almost useless. Training also helps them staying alive. They also need to be taught rudimentary tactics, like taking advantageous positions. NCO's need to be trained a lot more on that. One of the problems I expect the Nork units to have is that soldiers, NCOs and even junior officers show no initiative whatsoever and will always just wait for orders. That's just how Communist armies are organized. As the Great Helmsman said, power derives from the muzzle of a gun. So it's very important for the party leadership to have firm control over those who hold the guns. That means a rigid top-down command structure, with political officers assigned to all commanders down to company level (precisely to make sure the commanders don't do anything they are not explicitly ordered to do).
Thanks, Andrew. Given the items you outline, even well-trained troops with as rigid a command structure as you suggest, in a foreign country with language differences and in actual combat may leave a lot of room for errors and thus, reduce effectiveness. Truly they must wonder why they are in harm's way. Defections seem likely.
This is yesterdays news 🙄
https://kyivindependent.com/18-north-korean-soldier-detained/
Russian authorities detained 18 North Korean soldiers who abandoned their positions in Russia's Kursk Oblast, a military intelligence source told the Kyiv Independent on Oct. 21. …
….After the training, the 18 North Koreans were left in a forest in Kursk Oblast without food and instructions for several days, leading to them abandoning their post to find the Russian command on Oct. 14.
It's going to be a mess.
It is always easy to be brave on others behalf, but i think deploying european soldiers in Ukraine is what we need to do.
Its for Europe's future
I wonder if the North Korean deployment somehow... I want to say "justifies" a deployment of allied foreign troops on Ukrainian soil?
Hardly an "escalation" now.
Just keeping pace with North Korea ;)
I would say that it does. Perhaps Poland will be the first?
My guess is that it would be a group of states
China is also openly supporting ruscia by making drones, buying oil and gas. Wake up, Biden! I keep writing to him and Harris.
Whenever I look at the maps and the micro-advances, the phrase << inherit the wind >> comes to mind. The destruction is stark. What is the gain? Is it the fight for natural resources? Reports are that many of the Donbas mines have been destroyed or are in disrepair. Yet, there may be more precious resources that do not need infrastructure.
It is somewhat easier to understand Crimea. Having a port that is ice free in that area is of considerable importance. Hmm... Is anything still happening in Crimea?
Noithing will happen in Crimea for now as Ukraine lacks the western long-range strike to run the campaign that they want. The gain for Russia is small amounts of strategically unimportant territory--on the assumption that Trump wins and they get to keep it.
What about the ATACMS and Storm Shadows that are permitted to strike inside occupied Ukraine? Are you saying that those weapons have been cut off too? Is NATO just supplying artillery (and HIMARS) and armour and nothing else? F-16s are not nothing but so far are ineffective.
Nice allies Ukraine has.
Bear in mind that Russia leased Sevastopol naval base from Ukraine prior to the war. The lease wasn’t due to expire until 2042. But, yeah, now there is an overland route from Russia to the naval base.
Yep---the rail line through occupied Ukraine is a real problem
Why that can’t be taken out I don’t understand. UAF seem to be able to launch sea drone OK in that area.
Philips, this seems to be another Zeitenwende. So what should the US and Europe do? The French to deploy their Foreign Legion plus Finnish special forces? Or would be you can use our stuff wherever and however you like?
Not to go back to the Foreign Affairs piece we wrote in April--but I would start putting in place that plan. Starting with European troops in Ukraine to handle air defense against missiles and drones, and forces to do training in ukraine.
I think Europe is waiting for the U.S. to bail them out.
They are certainly waiting and hoping Harris wins--they lack unity,
Europeans are waiting for someone to take charge. That seems to fall on the US. I would argue that the US, IMHO, is waiting for someone to take charge even though that sounds silly because one would say Biden is in charge. It may take someone in the Baltics, Romania, Poland, or the French Foreign Legion to say, “f—- it”, we’re going in and let the chips fall where they may. I don’t see any other way. Biden is paralyzed with fright and the US is incapable of standing up to Russia like JFK did in 1962.
Back to the bigger picture - it's so appalling that Biden doubles down US support of a genocidal war being waged by Israel, weakening both the US's and Israel's moral standing and support globally. While refusing to adequately support a democratic Ukraine as it is slowly experiencing its own grinding genocide at the hands of a brutal authoritarian Russia/Putin. Thus putting Europe and western democracies in general in some real peril down the line. And now in the latest installment Putin spits in Biden's face by introducing N. Korean troops into the war - i.e. escalating in a major way while continuing to keep Biden cowering with his tried and true nuclear escalating threats. And where is Macron, for god's sake? Why are the European democracies so afraid of stepping up when Washington won't? Am I wrong that this whole crew of "leaders" is lacking one key quality: leadership? Forgive my primal scream. I keep thinking this is how it must have seemed to clear eyed observers in the late '30s.
100% agreed. Biden is waiting til Jan 20/25 when he can run home and hide in Delaware so he can say that Russia didn’t drop a nuclear bomb on my watch. He doesn’t care about the humiliation that follows him.
The fact that Biden is so devoted to Israel and not Ukraine is repulsive. Maybe that will change when Iran gets a nuclear bomb. (I don’t wish for that to happen)
I totally agree with you when you say that introducing N Korean troops to the theatre is like Putin spitting in Biden’s face.
NATO’s humiliation has no limits.
Also, totally agree with “where’s Macron”? Where’s the UK?
I join you in a primal scream.
And let's not forget the danger of Biden's choice to provide endless military support to Israel in this conflict possibly igniting a catastrophic regional war in the Mideast, one that would surely drag the US in. "Foreign policy chops"?
Going all out to support Israel, including direct US involvement, is the only chance to avoid a catastrophic regional war in the Middle East. The last thing Iran wants is to drag the US in. Biden is absolutely right to raise the stakes for Iran. It will also help a lot with Ukraine, as it will make Saudi Arabia much more open to the idea of lowering oil prices. Make no mistake: almost all Arab countries support Israel (for all practical purposes, Israel is now the true leader of the Arab League). When we talk about "regional war", we really mean Iran (and its proxies) vs. the rest of the region.
I.e. overarming one ally and under arming another...when it should be just the opposite. Could Biden be dyslexic? (forgive me)
I expect no significant changes to the U.S. and Europe's position on Zelensky's plan for victory until after the U.S. presidential election. With a Harris victory there might be some hope that aid to Ukraine will increase. For Europe, regardless of the U.S. outcome, the introduction of North Korean combat troops will most likely put added pressure on the Baltic states to take more drastic measures to support Ukraine and strengthen their own defenses. Their biggest problem, of course, is that they have little "defense in depth". Winter weather and the onset of "rasputitsda" will probably give Ukraine a respite from major actions (unfortunately, that also applies to Russia) and give Europe time to build up their own defense infrastructure. Whether...and to what extent...they will do so remains to be seen because "talk is cheap" and Europe is very good at "talking". It seems likely that the spring of 2025 will be the pivotal time in this war and the West must do all things necessary to ensure a Urainian victory. I confess that I am not as hopeful as I once was in this regard because I see an incredibly short-sighted move towards dis-engagement on the part of certain European states. If Trump wins (may the Gods forbid!) the U.S. will most assuredly reduce, or stop entirely, any further assistance. Then, the best Ukraine can hope for is a stalemate.
Even forceful action by Harris may be too little, too late and will be stymied by the Trumplicans in Congress and possibly lead Trump to encourage fighting in the streets to press isolationism.
I found out why the U.S. often has to be involved in targeting long range strikes.
It’s because Russia is able to jam GPS, and so terrain contour matching systems to guide cruise missiles are important, and apparently the U.S. does not share that mapping data with our partners.
So, the U.S. has to provide the necessary targeting information in order to use the terrain contour matching system to carry out a long range strike.
https://youtu.be/Bv2fjrJt3LU?si=WMul1Q5lZ7u3VjSX&t=739
Ukraine has its own version of this terrain contour following technology for the AQ 400 Scythe drone, which I think is a major reason they are able to conduct successful long range strikes deep inside Russia.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c6240qepyppo
Beyond depressing all round. And gives rise to a much wider more strategic discussion about the virtues of ‘deterrence’. Am I the only one to see that it certainly works - but apparently only against the west? Pretty sure that’s not what was originally intended but that’s where we are.
North Korean troops on the ground in Europe? Go us. What a strategic victory for the west this is turning out to be……..
So the facility pictured above where North Korean troops as staging, that facility has geolocation coordinates. Right now those coordinates are not being utilized, but they can be. That's all I'm going to say for now.
As noted earlier, NK has a million troops and cares not for 10,000 casualties. Just like Russian disregard for their own citizens.
Depressing beyond belief, but we must face the reality. A vengeful willing fools may shortly be President, Ukraine may be wiped off the map by snatching defeat from the jaws of possible victory, Germany and the rest of Europe will accommodate Russian planning, China strangles Taiwan and Saudi Arabia bends the knee to Iran and Israel will face the need to project nuclear strength. It looks like the Western world is on the verge of folding. All the leaders are Neville Chamberlain....
Hear, hear. NATO’s leaders are all Chamberlains and all are enablers of Putin.
Time for S. Korea to send its intelligence agents - and some troops - to Ukraine. So they can be ready for N Koreans prisoners getting taken - and interrogating them, deprogramming them, recruiting them.