A few weeks ago, I had a depressing insight into the fact that a war can die. To run through a few of the wars that the United States has participated in:
The Revolutionary War has never died. Its main effect the creation of the United States has been continuously embraced since 1776.
The Civil War died in the late 1870s. The North allowed the South to reimpose virtual slavery upon African Americans in southern states. The Civil War came back to life in the 1950s with the civil rights movement.
World War I with its principle of self-determination for every ethnic group— nationhood for Poland Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, etc.— is still basically alive. However the idea of a international body that could enforce global security has faltered in the form of the League of Nations and the United Nations.
World War II with its principle of no change in national boundaries by force used to be quite alive, but I now fear it is dying before our eyes. It has certainly died for the new American isolationist movement. Trump certainly does not believe in that principle. I think Trump would rather have a root canal than give further aid to Ukraine.
Nice observations, Kathleen. From my perspective, wars continue on but with long pauses in between, or at a smoldering level. WW II never concluded we simply called it the Cold War. The war continues as Putin takes on the role of Hitler while he suppresses the ethnic minorities in the Federation. Which also means WW I smolders underneath that as well. We are still fighting the US civil war. Let’s just say the quest for money, power, and dominion over others will never end.
Interesting reflection---I have no idea where we are now. We are certainly seeing a rejection of the post-1945 consensus--so it really is a rejection of everyone that we have known for my life---whether its harkening back, or just a leap into the unknown--I have no idea
Indeed a rejection of the post 1945 consensus by Russia and Trump and possibly China, though Taiwan is a special case. Otherwise, the post 1945 consensus remains but from “weaker powers” by which I mean the EU, UK and former commonwealth nations, and the Asian nations outside of China. I fear this will lead to a re-arming across the board with the lack of any US guarantee to the rest of NATO, S Korea, Japan Australia so as to meet any future challenges. This has its good points, but it also raises the possibility of mistakes and misunderstandings taking hold to be lit by a single event (e.g. Franz Ferdinand and then WW I). To call it it multi-polar would not be quite right in my mind, but a form of chaos as many nations seek to defend their own interests in ways we cannot yet understand.
If Germans feel they are no longer living under the safety of the US shield it will begin to re-arm in earnest. France and UK will need to follow suit. Poland will continue to grow its arms industry and military. The economic transformation of Europe since the first half of the 1900’s may result in all of this increased arms build up leading to the status quo with Europe being its own shield and not using their arms as a spear. With advances in science ensuring food and energy supplies peoples lives should continue to be comfortable in Europe. Mass starvation and destitution should not be a contributing variable to the outbreak of multi-country warfare. Trump at the most has four years. He should lose the house in two years. The man is a potential menace to world order, but let’s allow American institutions to give us some confidence.
Poland can build / buy arms because their economy is not stagnating like the rest of Europe. Germany, Italy, etc. are all increasingly in trouble re population dynamics where the number of retirees per worker are exploding. That puts on serious fiscal pressure and the Euro strictures limit borrowing. Basically, every government is slowly going bankrupt.
Secondly, between the influence of the AfD on the rise and the tumult in German politics, I see more attempts in the future to buy off Putin rather than prepare for war. AfD is Putin friendly and German industry / people want cheap gas.
So I doubt there is a will to pay to prepare for direct conflict with an enemy that most folk now likely look on as a nuclear armed paper tiger that has to go through Poland before it can reach Germany.
Ive always thought that Trump has little desire to aid Ukraine--he likes Putin, he doesnt like Ukraine. If he does it, its from purely political fear would be my guess. And yet he doesnt have lots to fear from Republicans.
What do people mean when they talk about stopping aid? The final package has just been announced, and no more aid can be provided under the law. Nobody is even suggesting a new package in Congress. The aid has stopped, and there not even any plans to restart it. Trump does not actually have to do anything to end support for Ukraine - just refrain from asking the Congress for a new package.
To be precise, Trump does not have to ask Congress for an aid package. There is still a bipartisan majority in Congress for aid to Ukraine. If they wish, Congress can pass a bill and present it to Trump for his signature or veto. Admittedly, I do not think there is a 2/3 majority in Congress to override a trump veto.
The next major opportunity will be during confirmation hearings for State, Defense, etc. In the background American petroleum companies will be pushing hard to maintain warfare in Ukraine, so they can continue to build out the infrastructure to compete against Russian oil on the continent.
You are describing exactly what happened in April 2024, but eventually Johnson succumbed to pressure from Republicans to allow the bill to be voted on. It passed. I think that will probably not happen again, but I think there is a small chance.
He only succumbed because Trump relented and allowed that. The continued existence of Ukraine, Taiwan, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is now entirely up to Trump, and there's nothing anyone else can do about that. Trump had to be stopped. But the Left is even more opposed to the American led rules based liberal international order than the Right (basically, the Right thinks Pax Americana is expensive and unnecessary, and the Left thinks it's expensive and evil).
But if there hadn't been pressure from Republicans in Congress, trump would never have allowed Johnson to proceed. What you say about left and right is largely correct, but there is still a majority for aid to Ukraine and Congress from both parties.
But Trump does not have an election to win. So what's in it for him? I'll be ecstatic if he at least agrees to sell weapons to Ukraine (then the Europeans can provide the funds).
Interesting point. If Trump wants to continue aid (a big and very uncertain if) I have no doubt that most Republicans will fall in line with their master and approve it in Congress quickly. He will get what he wants. If he doesnt want any aid--thats it--no more.
He does not. The only question is whether he will leave any sanctions in place. His planned meeting with Putin is an extremely bad news. A meeting with any US president would be a huge propaganda victory for Putin. As a minimum, he could have been told not to bomb Ukrainian power grid as a precondition for a meeting - or even to refrain from any offensive operations. But he was not (just as Trump met with Kim without any preconditions). And it will be even worse at the actual meeting. Trump will probably talk to Putin without any other Americans (apart from an interpreter) in the room. And he'll hate to leave without any agreement, since he won't any coverage with headlines like "the summit failed to resolve...". So there's a significant chance that when Putin speaks on May 9 at the parade on the 80th anniversary of "Great Victory", he'll boast of the US and major European countries recognizing Russian annexation of Crimea (and perhaps other territories).
To say Trump “seems” to be operating under Russian reflexive control is an understatement. He is functionally a Russian agent as he showed himself to be during his first term and in his “investment life” taking and laundering Russian oligarch money and that only increased during the Great Recession. Current US allies, if they were smart, would not share intelligence or sensitive information once Trump in office as it will surely find its way into Russian hands.
With regard to aid to Ukraine, it will not come from the US. It will have to come from France, Poland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Czechia, and hopefully Germany. Phillips, if the EU had any economic brains (I fear they have been eaten by the Germans in this regard), they would engage in deficit spending, expand the defense industries which would create jobs and economic growth within the EU, and allow for joint borrowing and spending to meet the Russian threat as well as a counterweight to Trump. I know I am preaching to the choir, but this is a win-win opportunity for Europe if they choose tío take it. I have even seen the Finnish PM suggest this course, and fiscally they are quite conservative.
They might have to do that (deficit spend to build military forces) but that will only happen if Trump forces them to by pulling out. I think now that might be good thing
There are positive developments. The first EU Defence Commissioner Andrius Kubilius has already asked for a budget of 100 billion euro for defence projects in the EU. Not saving the money will be there instantly though. Slowly, but surely the EU will find its way. And the UK will be part of it hopefully, in some type of cooperation (https://www.politico.eu/article/kubilius-next-budget-should-have-e100-billion-for-defense/).
Thanks for the article. You are masterful at putting things together to make sense—if anything in wars can make sense. I wonder how far Trump will try to weaken NATO. As troubling as his being Putin's echo is here in the US, the question of Europe's defense is up for grabs. Sober times, indeed.
Think back to the Kharkiv offense. If Ukraine had been given sufficient materiel in advance of that offensive then the war would likely have been over by now.
At this point, the Ukrainians need a lot more kit to get the job done because they lack people and so much has been smashed to bits. Yet the west keeps serving up drips and drabs. The Russians are also dying - en masse, with little to show for it.
2025 is likely the year that the Russian economy will start imploding just as the various Soviet depots also run dry of 1950’s junk to send to the front. It could have been the year that re-establishes territorial integrity for Ukraine.
And not that Biden covered himself in glory re: his Ukraine policy but rather that the next guy will be even worse.
Here, Here, Constantin! It is not just about kit in the battle space. I will focus on energy security. While the Russians have hit most large central power plants (fossil and hydro) what can be done is distributed energy and micro grids. These are more resilient to large missile and drone attacks. Also, a big thing the rest of the EU can do is increase the power transfer capability into Ukraine via ENTSO-E projects and also building specific power plants that are designed to feed into Ukraine but are within NATO. It is of course not cheap, but again, it can provide the energy input necessary for Ukraine to keep developing and building the kit they need and it is a win for the EU economies as well.
Thank you for your expertise on this subject. The infrastructure of the former SU is mostly still intact in its former countries, think of the energy grid, pipelines, highways and railroads. I remember travelling by train from Moldova to Romania some years ago, we had to change from the Russian broad gauge to Western rail standards. The method used was by lifting the wagons in the air and change the train chassis.
Arent, you are too kind. I work in power systems and energy and happen to be familiar with all that. It is little understood but oh so crucial. As a member of ENTSO-E, the Slovak threat of cutting power to Ukraine is a non-starter and really an empty threat as it would violate the terms of being part of the EU grid.
As for the old USSR infrastructure, your experience in Romania is one of those examples of why disconnecting from old Russian infrastructure makes so much sense!
Russia is in trouble, but Ukraine is also having its issues with manpower and modern equipment. Ukraine could be helped through this--but so far its not being.
I pick one nit with your post: are Russians really dying en masse? I've been reading that Putin has kept the Russians adjacent to political influence out of the war. Not saying Putin has bottomless resources, but he has militarized the society and shielded any potential opposition from having influence. Ethnic minorities are bearing the brunt.
They are certainly dying in mass numbers. It will be interesting to see if they can keep generating 30k a month (which is the minimum they will need if they are losing 40k+
The Russian federation has lost 400k+ troops to gain less than 0.5% of Ukrainian territory. If that isn’t a sign of strategic failure, I don’t know what is.
Granted, most of these troops are drawn from areas outside the St. Petersburg / Moscow center of the Russian political universe but given Russian birth rates, such losses are simply not sustainable.
Even the N. Korean cannon fodder is not making a difference in Kursk other than giving Ukrainian FPV drone operators ghoulish target training.
Thing is, look at the discontent in the west re inflation and now relativize it to Russia. Imagine a central bank rate at 21%. That makes the Volpe years look like a walk in the park. Inflation is hitting all aspects of the economy and the ruble has already started to slide.
Basically, the Russian economy is headed for a controlled flight into ground and that will affect the folk adjacent to power just as hard, if not harder, than the folk in the provinces.
How dare you! Wildly inaccurate. It's 0.69% of territory last year. At current rates it will Russia a mere 116 years to occupy the remaining 80% of Ukraine, not your unrealistic 160 years. :P
In addition to all your very well made points, people (especially in the commentariat) forget Putin faces a demographic squeeze just like Ukraine.
Unfortunately, the American Civil War never ended. Today, aided by the Republican southern strategy, we hear Confederate voices among Trump supporters. We need to keep fighting.
Not just Confederate voices, but Confederate flags used in the attack on free elections. Now Trump promises to undo the renaming of military bases named for Confederate officers and governors like DeSantis are restoring the fake history of slavery--a history spun by the Daughters of the Confederacy-- to school textbooks.
Recently I read some articles about how Trump reactions are part of a 'Madman' strategy. This refers to Nixon deliberatedly acting as a madman to confuse foes and allies alike, and that he could do almost anything to achieve his goals. The rationale being that by acting mad he could persuade countries to do as he wanted. With Trump I'm not so sure, it sounds more like a theory than anything. If Trump acts like anyone, it would be like a robber baron.
Trump's years-long history of saying nice things about Kim, Putin, and XI indicate that he feels a brotherly affinity to these guys. He has often said they are strong men who give strong leadership to their countries. He wants to be just like them—a strong man who gives strong leadership to women, Canada, Greenland, etc.
Nixon was a brilliant, if flawed thinker and paranoid insecure bully. Trump is hardly brilliant in that sense, but fits the insecure and bully parts just fine.
The Watergate era was difficult to wade through. The issues that surfaced: Hoover's antics, enemy lists, cover-ups, a criminal Attorney General, and all the rest that unraveled impressed me. I was living in DC and the town was in shock. It took John Dean, one person, to make some sense of everything happening.
I have a feeling we will be revisiting part of this past. One thing I am sure of ... the enemy's list is long. Hopefully, we will also find that one person if needed.
Not just revisiting this part of the past, but also far exceeding those bars of corruption, criminality, lies, disinformation, cover-ups, and naked power grabs that are blatantly unlawful and unconstitutional. Part of our problem is the job of reconciling the rule of law with Watergate was never finished. Allowed to pass with Ford’s pardon of Nixon and subsequent resurrection of Nixon starting with the David Frost interview. It sent a signal that at the highest levels there would be no accountability to the law. This was affirmed with Iran-Contra and then has snowballed from there. Like you, I lived through all these (albeit young at the time of Watergate).
The problem with it is that it destroys the trust that is foundational to any truly successful organization. Look at Putin's Russia to see where it leads--where those in power routinely tell obvious lies to demonstrate their arrogant impunity, to keep the population confused and subservient.
The Madman Theory has been discredited as a negotiating tool. It might work for a while against dim opponents, along the lines of the teppichfresser model Hitler used. But it didn't win Hitler his war, nor did it help Nixon win his wa. It generally ends with the targets of the Madman Theory developing an implacable rage that can only be extinguished by doing away with the "madman."
Successful nations are those that, as Teddy Roosevelt said, "talk softly and carry a big stick."
Thanks, Phillips, for continuing to offer your thoughts. In my view, it is a mistake to take anything Trump says seriously, and doubly so before the inauguration. Certainly he has always appreciated authoritarians and their narratives. We will see what happens. My preference is for anything that induces the Europeans to grow a pair.
Hi Paul--I agree with any one-off comment. However certain things Trump repeats time and time again (such as the Russian viewpoint on NATO causing the invasion). In that case, I do think its meaningful
Unfortunately I think that is the case too. The UK in particular. I hope UK media will press Starmer on why the prosecutor will defer to the convicted felon, but realistically I doubt it.
Here's another round-up from the last week of Ukraine-related events you or may not have heard about.
- There’s been a huge blow to Russian hegemony. And it’s all Putin’s fault for not supporting Armenia.
“The Armenian government approved a draft law on January 9, beginning Armenia's accession process into the EU. ..Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced on January 9 that the Armenian government does not object to the law's adoption and noted that the Armenian population must approve the decision on Armenia's possible future EU membership through a referendum.”
- This week, Russian elites proved how clueless they are. And Western journalists repeated the process. Here’s the ISW’s better informed take:
“Russian elites' reported diagnosis of the main problem with Russia's conduct of the war is inaccurate, as Russia's failure to restore maneuver to the battlefield—not a shortage of manpower—is the main factor causing Russia's relatively slow rate of advance. [The] reported focus on mobilizing more personnel indicates that [they] likely view a lack of manpower as Russia's largest constraint… rather than the ineffectiveness of frontline forces, poor campaign-planning abilities of commanders, and significant armored vehicle shortages that Russian forces are currently suffering… Their inability to conduct rapid, mechanized maneuver has prevented Russian forces from converting tactical gains into …the rapid gains, deep penetrations, and significant battlefield victories that the Russian elites likely desire.”
- “A hell with all its demons”. How a juvenile detention centre in Taganrog was turned into a torture camp for Ukrainian prisoners:
“Russian opposition outlet Mediazona reported that Russian authorities have been torturing Ukrainian POWs and civilians at the SIZO-2 in Taganrog and reported several accounts from Ukrainian POWs detailing the extent and high frequency of the physical and sexual abuse that the Russian guards inflict on the Ukrainian prisoners.”
“The leaders of the Chechen "Akhmat" Spetsnaz forces and the far-right paramilitary unit "Rusich" Russian Sabotage Assault Reconnaissance Group met on January 6 and promoted a message about Russia's ethnic diversity and harmony.”
Rusich are openly and avowedly Nazis. What a meeting of minds.
Here’s an aid to Ukraine roundup for everyone who only ever hears about US aid packages:
1. "The EU recently transferred three billion euros (about $3.07 billion) to Ukraine, the first tranche of EU funding from the profits of frozen Russian assets…The G7 Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) Loans initiative will provide a total of $50 billion to Ukraine from the profits of seized Russian assets, including a total of $20 billion from the EU."
2 From Forbes: "…the U.K. government announced 30,000 ‘state-of-the-art, first-person view [FPV] drones’ were being sent to help the fight against Russian aggression and to ‘target enemy positions and armoured vehicles.’ The announcement is part of the Drone Capability Coalition effort to support Ukraine with surveillance and attack drones. Funding for the 30,000 drones comes from UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Latvia and Sweden under a £45m ($55m) contract.
"Perhaps the most significant difference between FPVs and other military hardware is the cost. A U.S.-made Javelin missile, the pinnacle of excellence in anti-tank missiles, costs $202,000, so it can only be supplied in limited numbers. FPVs costing $500 each may be less effective (though the actual effectiveness of the Javelin is seldom discussed) , but can be acquired easily in vast numbers and used against individual enemy soldiers."
3. Germany will provide even more IRIS-T air defence systems (six) than expected in 2025. These are just as important to Ukraine as the Patriot batteries many NATO members have already supplied.
4. The first state-of-the-art 155-mm automated RCH-155 self-propelled howitzers will also be delivered. The total number of these units, which has already been ordered by the German government, has increased to fifty-four.
5. In addition to all the other artillery initiatives, Germany is now, on its own, supplying 50,000 155mm artillery shells a month. With munitions manufacturing plants opening across Europe, Ukraine no longer faces a repeat of the GOP-inspired shell drought of January-March last year.
6. With 300K 30mm shells already provided, Rheinmetall are to deliver 180,000 rounds for the fivty-five highly effective Gepard and six Cheetah anti-aircraft tanks supplied by Germany. Thirteen more of the former and five more of the latter will be delivered in 2025.
7.Thanks to a German circular exchange with Croatia, 30 tanks and 30 infantry fighting vehicles were transferred to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. These are likely M-84 tanks and M-80A infantry fighting vehicles
8. The first ten of the 200+ next generation Lynx infantry fighting vehicles have already arrived in Ukraine. The same with the next batch of Swedish CV90 IFVs. Like the Rheinmetall Lynx (built in Hungary, go figure), more than 200 of CV90s will be delivered in 2025-26.
There is lots of bad news for Russia (Syria too). If Ukraine were helped--the war would be heading towards a Ukrainian victory. However, its not--or not enough.
PART III Under-reported news from the fighting. You’d need a magnifying glass to see any territory gained or lost on a map this week, but there are interesting strategic developments as Ukraine increases its attack on Russian war-fighting capacity.
Jan 7. Ukrainian kamikaze drones set fire to the strategically important Kristal fuel depot at Engels on the Volga River. It still burns today (12th), five days later. It is claimed 800,000 tonnes of specialised T-8V fuel for Russia’s long range Tu-160 supersonic bombers has already gone up in the blaze. Tu-160s last launched cruise missiles at Ukrainian cities and infrastructure on Nov 24th last year.
Jan 7. It was reported that; “On the morning of December 13, when Russia launched nearly 200 drones and more than 90 missiles at Ukraine, a Ukrainian F-16 managed to destroy six missiles in a single combat mission.“ It is uncorroborated so far but, if confirmed, shows the true worth of the F-16's advanced capabilities.
Jan 7. Ukraine struck the command post of the 810th Naval Infantry Brigade in Kursk. A repeat of an attack three weeks ago. The 810th NIB is notorious for its war crimes. Whenever they get the opportunity, Ukraine goes after them.
Jan 9. The T-90 is Russia’s most modern battle tank. Soldiers from the 54th Mechanized Brigade recently captured one intact. That single tank represents more than one per cent of Russia’s annual output of new tanks. In 2024, it manufactured only 60-80 of them.
Jan 9. As ever, according to Russian media, all Ukrainian drones are shot down and never hit their targets. Somehow, ‘falling debris’ seems to do an awful lot of damage. Interestingly, the Cherkizovo Chicken Kingdom, a chicken processing plant in the Kursk oblast suffered just such an unfortunate fate as it burnt to the ground. If it is the start of a wider campaign against Russian food production, things could get interesting. Food shortages are one of Putin’s and the FSB’s biggest fears.
Jan 10. Ukraine launched its largest and widest-ranging drone assault of the war on Russian logistics and key facilities across Russia, attacking at least fifteen targets.
“Strikes have been reported in Melitopol, Berdiansk, Mariupol, and surrounding areas, as well as Taganrog, Anapa, Slavyansk-on-Kuban, Krasnodar, Novorossiysk (the Port of Kavkaz), Voronezh, Kursk, Dzhankoy, Kerch, and Feodosia. These areas include critical infrastructure and logistical hubs, highlighting the strategic intent behind the operation.”
"I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia. Why are we doing that? We're just escalating this war and making it worse. That should not have been allowed to be done,"
What I am watching is what trump does when his campaign rhetoric meets the reality of the war in Ukraine. It's easy enough to say that US missiles should not be fired into Russian. But how long can you ignore the missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian civilian targets? The wake up call is coming. If Trump really wants to act as a Putin agent then we can certainly define him as one.
Let's assume that on day one Trump rescinds the US authorization to fire US missiles into Russian territory. Will Russia stop too? If yes a victory for Trump diplomacy. If no, a Ukrainian school, apartment building or other soft civilian target gets hit and Trump immediately looks foolish. The situation is what it is and there are no easy chess moves to make.
Both Mike Waltz and Keith Kellogg are making stronger defense statements than Trump. I think as the process moves forward their voices will have more weight.
How long can those who suffer from apocalyptic fires and hurricanes beyond any historical precedent deny global warming as a "Chinese hoax"? How long can a nation that suffered a million deaths from Covid deny the efficacy of vaccines, with the incoming Administration signaling it wants to do away with even the polio vaccine? How long can a nation which has claimed for over 200 years to believe in the fundamental equality of human beings--regularly invoking the gospels to justify its actions-- continue to provide substandard education, medical services, and justice to over half of its population?
The denial will continue until reality forcefully rebukes it.
If Trump does, in fact, restrict or drop aid for Ukraine and the EU follows suit, as good lap dogs do, then I think it very likely that Ukraine will double down on developing nuclear weapons. Any "negotiation" with Putin, even for a limited ceasefire, will only give Russia time to re-arm and re-train a field army. The same holds true for a "peace" that sees Ukraine acqiesce to giving up 20% of their territory. It's only putting off renewed Russian aggression at a later date. It's a tragedy that the West (and Ukraine!) finds itself in this position because a firm military response in 2023-24 could have seen Putin's defeat. Ukraine is already sensing the growing disillusionment on the part of its western allies and what that portends for the future. That "future", as an independent state, is in danger and their options (thanks to the latest political developments in the U.S. and Europe) are fast becoming more limited. What else can they do?
Robert Kagan wrote a long and powerful analysis of Ukraine's prospects in the Atlantic. It is stark and dreary: he believes Putin will win the war in 12-18 months in brutal fashion if Trump doesn't reverse course.
Claire Berlinski and others have greatly excerpted the article here on substack.
Phillips, hope you will comment on this important and disturbing piece.
BTW, it was telling that the piece slipped quickly from the "most read" list on the Atlantic. Most people in U.S. don't want to think about Ukraine's burden anymore. In most reflection pieces on Biden's presidency, Ukraine is getting a sentence or two.
I think the article was overly dramatic, and written to try and push the Trump people to aid Ukraine. It underestimated Russian weakness and discounted the European ability to make a difference. Ukraine is not in great shape--but if Europe helps, it can persevere even without the USA.
A couple passages based on Kagan's assumption that Ukraine will be toast by the end of this year and understatement of Ukrainian resolve/nascent defense production of its own/probable limited but much needed EU support and his casting Putin as a man in no hurry:
"Some hopeful souls argue that Putin will be more flexible once talks begin. But this is based on the mistaken assumption that Putin believes he needs a respite from the fighting. He doesn’t. Yes, the Russian economy is suffering. Yes, Russian losses at the front remain staggeringly high. Yes, Putin lacks the manpower both to fight and to produce vital weaponry and is reluctant to risk political upheaval by instituting a full-scale draft. If the war were going to drag on for another two years or more, these problems might eventually force Putin to seek some kind of truce, perhaps even the kind of agreement Americans muse about. But Putin thinks he’s going to win sooner than that, and he believes that Russians can sustain their present hardships long enough to achieve victory."
........
"That is the key point: Putin sees the timelines working in his favor. Russian forces may begin to run low on military equipment in the fall of 2025, but by that time Ukraine may already be close to collapse. Ukraine can’t sustain the war another year without a new aid package from the United States. Ukrainian forces are already suffering from shortages of soldiers, national exhaustion, and collapsing morale. Russia’s casualty rate is higher than Ukraine’s, but there are more Russians than Ukrainians, and Putin has found a way to keep filling the ranks, including with foreign fighters. As one of Ukraine’s top generals recently observed, “the number of Russian troops is constantly increasing.” This year, he estimates, has brought 100,000 additional Russian troops to Ukrainian soil. Meanwhile, lack of equipment prevents Ukraine from outfitting reserve units."
I sure like your "people make up your own minds" suggestion. This is no easy call, even among pro-Ukraine ppl who steadfastly urge Russia's defeat. All of Kagan's arguments are solid and plausible, IMO. Yet it is possible that he is simply wrong on UKR's durability, as Phillips believes. I don't buy that Kagan is JUST artfully making arguments to persuade the incoming Trump government, even if that is his key objective. Kagan's fears of a UKR defeat are sincere IMO.
Most of us here seem to agree that Putin won't sign any worthwhile deal, as your quotations argue. But this is a separate issue from UKR's actual sustainability.
I agree that Kagan's concerns are sincere - and all too plausible. I guess my main criticism is that his "Ukraine can't endure" argument repeats so much of the media narrative over the past 18 months or more. Naive and perhaps dangerous but I continue to hope that Ukraine can prevail, however the Ukrainians define that word. As Emily Dickinson wrote,
Just to add a little detail: Kagan measures Putin's hand to be objectively strong, with putin likely feeling invincible. The notion that Putin would ever agree to a useful peace deal is not just wrong, it's absurd.
You'd have to read the article for details of how Putin can likely manage the pressures he faces and persevere to victory. (I think the Atlantic allows 1 free article read per month.)
Thanks for this. Assuming then that Ukraine's use of allied supplied, long range weapons stops and they concentrate more on refining their own Neptune technology, what's to stop European NATO members from aiding that effort substantially? Maybe they already are for all I know.
Ukraine produced 6,000 long range drones last year. Plans to build an order of magnitude more this year. The same with Neptunes. They now use cheap drones to exhaust Russian air defences then hit their target with Neptunes. All of that without even European aid. The US can do nothing about that.
I believe it is highly likely that Trump is directly as well as indirectly under Putin's control. I became convinced of this after seeing Trump's extraordinary body language during the 16 July 2018 Helsinki summit. His facial expressions in particular directly after his 2 hour closed door meeting with Putin - no aides present, just one interpreter for each - exhibited what I interpreted to be naked shame and guilt. They were remarkable expressions and I have never seen them on Trump's face since. This is where I believe Putin insisted that Trump humiliate himself publicly by contradicting his own US intelligence agencies and say there was no reason for Russia to meddle in the 2016 election. "President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be." Trump is not just a Russian asset, he's under Putin's direct control. And Putin is clever enough to disguise this by having Trump occasionally go against Russian interest, when directed. Yes, circumstantial evidence, subjective as well. But this is what my gut tells me. There are more kinds of evidence - Trump's personal seizing of his interpreter's notes after a meeting with Putin, his insistence no aides be present at some of these meetings, his secret phone calls with Putin both while in and out of office... but those incredible facial expressions on July 16, 2018 convinced me. Of course, I hope I'm wrong. (And yes, perhaps it was Trump's ego - rather than Putin's insistence - which wouldn't allow him to admit Putin helped put him into the presidency. Perhaps.)
Am I wrong in thinking that it has been a while since russia launched a major attack on Ukkraines energy infrastructure. The people in Kyiv I follow were mentioning blackouts a month ago but not recently. Has the russian terror campaign failed again this winter?
Ukraines missile campaign on strategic assets seems to increasing substantially in the last few weeks.
Good question. I know that Russia continues to use drone attacks on cities, but it seems like Ukraine does a pretty good job of shooting them down. Last I recall, I think that Russian missile attacks on cities had reduced in number, and speculation was that they were possibly accumulating weapons for a major strike. Or maybe they are just having trouble feeding the beast of war.
A few weeks ago, I had a depressing insight into the fact that a war can die. To run through a few of the wars that the United States has participated in:
The Revolutionary War has never died. Its main effect the creation of the United States has been continuously embraced since 1776.
The Civil War died in the late 1870s. The North allowed the South to reimpose virtual slavery upon African Americans in southern states. The Civil War came back to life in the 1950s with the civil rights movement.
World War I with its principle of self-determination for every ethnic group— nationhood for Poland Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, etc.— is still basically alive. However the idea of a international body that could enforce global security has faltered in the form of the League of Nations and the United Nations.
World War II with its principle of no change in national boundaries by force used to be quite alive, but I now fear it is dying before our eyes. It has certainly died for the new American isolationist movement. Trump certainly does not believe in that principle. I think Trump would rather have a root canal than give further aid to Ukraine.
Nice observations, Kathleen. From my perspective, wars continue on but with long pauses in between, or at a smoldering level. WW II never concluded we simply called it the Cold War. The war continues as Putin takes on the role of Hitler while he suppresses the ethnic minorities in the Federation. Which also means WW I smolders underneath that as well. We are still fighting the US civil war. Let’s just say the quest for money, power, and dominion over others will never end.
Interesting reflection---I have no idea where we are now. We are certainly seeing a rejection of the post-1945 consensus--so it really is a rejection of everyone that we have known for my life---whether its harkening back, or just a leap into the unknown--I have no idea
Indeed a rejection of the post 1945 consensus by Russia and Trump and possibly China, though Taiwan is a special case. Otherwise, the post 1945 consensus remains but from “weaker powers” by which I mean the EU, UK and former commonwealth nations, and the Asian nations outside of China. I fear this will lead to a re-arming across the board with the lack of any US guarantee to the rest of NATO, S Korea, Japan Australia so as to meet any future challenges. This has its good points, but it also raises the possibility of mistakes and misunderstandings taking hold to be lit by a single event (e.g. Franz Ferdinand and then WW I). To call it it multi-polar would not be quite right in my mind, but a form of chaos as many nations seek to defend their own interests in ways we cannot yet understand.
agree with lots of this--the rearming is coming
Remember, China would like to return to Kamchatka, Russia would like to getAlaska back...
If Germans feel they are no longer living under the safety of the US shield it will begin to re-arm in earnest. France and UK will need to follow suit. Poland will continue to grow its arms industry and military. The economic transformation of Europe since the first half of the 1900’s may result in all of this increased arms build up leading to the status quo with Europe being its own shield and not using their arms as a spear. With advances in science ensuring food and energy supplies peoples lives should continue to be comfortable in Europe. Mass starvation and destitution should not be a contributing variable to the outbreak of multi-country warfare. Trump at the most has four years. He should lose the house in two years. The man is a potential menace to world order, but let’s allow American institutions to give us some confidence.
Europe will have to rearm--the question is how long it takes and whether they can do it in such a way as to help reinvigorate European ecnomies
I’ll disagree with you for two reasons.
Poland can build / buy arms because their economy is not stagnating like the rest of Europe. Germany, Italy, etc. are all increasingly in trouble re population dynamics where the number of retirees per worker are exploding. That puts on serious fiscal pressure and the Euro strictures limit borrowing. Basically, every government is slowly going bankrupt.
Secondly, between the influence of the AfD on the rise and the tumult in German politics, I see more attempts in the future to buy off Putin rather than prepare for war. AfD is Putin friendly and German industry / people want cheap gas.
So I doubt there is a will to pay to prepare for direct conflict with an enemy that most folk now likely look on as a nuclear armed paper tiger that has to go through Poland before it can reach Germany.
Without the Pax Americana, nuclear weapons will proliferate.
Ive always thought that Trump has little desire to aid Ukraine--he likes Putin, he doesnt like Ukraine. If he does it, its from purely political fear would be my guess. And yet he doesnt have lots to fear from Republicans.
Agree Kathleen. Another war I would add for the US is the first Gulf War in 1990.
In what sense has it been forgotten?
More in the sense of being still alive, very much so. It certainly hasn't been forgotten.
What do people mean when they talk about stopping aid? The final package has just been announced, and no more aid can be provided under the law. Nobody is even suggesting a new package in Congress. The aid has stopped, and there not even any plans to restart it. Trump does not actually have to do anything to end support for Ukraine - just refrain from asking the Congress for a new package.
To be precise, Trump does not have to ask Congress for an aid package. There is still a bipartisan majority in Congress for aid to Ukraine. If they wish, Congress can pass a bill and present it to Trump for his signature or veto. Admittedly, I do not think there is a 2/3 majority in Congress to override a trump veto.
They'll never dare to even bring up a bill that Trump opposes.
The next major opportunity will be during confirmation hearings for State, Defense, etc. In the background American petroleum companies will be pushing hard to maintain warfare in Ukraine, so they can continue to build out the infrastructure to compete against Russian oil on the continent.
They don't have that much influence on Trump.
But there are not even a handful of R that would push this as a bill, and Johnson would use procedural games to keep it from coming to the floor.
You are describing exactly what happened in April 2024, but eventually Johnson succumbed to pressure from Republicans to allow the bill to be voted on. It passed. I think that will probably not happen again, but I think there is a small chance.
He only succumbed because Trump relented and allowed that. The continued existence of Ukraine, Taiwan, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania is now entirely up to Trump, and there's nothing anyone else can do about that. Trump had to be stopped. But the Left is even more opposed to the American led rules based liberal international order than the Right (basically, the Right thinks Pax Americana is expensive and unnecessary, and the Left thinks it's expensive and evil).
But if there hadn't been pressure from Republicans in Congress, trump would never have allowed Johnson to proceed. What you say about left and right is largely correct, but there is still a majority for aid to Ukraine and Congress from both parties.
But Trump does not have an election to win. So what's in it for him? I'll be ecstatic if he at least agrees to sell weapons to Ukraine (then the Europeans can provide the funds).
Let’s hope they do it and soon.
Reporting suggests $3.3b left unused by Biden. ($3.8b minus $500m in “final” aid package).
*PSA: Edit functionality is now available in the Substack app! (I can’t believe how long that took)*
My understanding as well--not all aid has been given
Self-deterring right to the end.
Interesting point. If Trump wants to continue aid (a big and very uncertain if) I have no doubt that most Republicans will fall in line with their master and approve it in Congress quickly. He will get what he wants. If he doesnt want any aid--thats it--no more.
He does not. The only question is whether he will leave any sanctions in place. His planned meeting with Putin is an extremely bad news. A meeting with any US president would be a huge propaganda victory for Putin. As a minimum, he could have been told not to bomb Ukrainian power grid as a precondition for a meeting - or even to refrain from any offensive operations. But he was not (just as Trump met with Kim without any preconditions). And it will be even worse at the actual meeting. Trump will probably talk to Putin without any other Americans (apart from an interpreter) in the room. And he'll hate to leave without any agreement, since he won't any coverage with headlines like "the summit failed to resolve...". So there's a significant chance that when Putin speaks on May 9 at the parade on the 80th anniversary of "Great Victory", he'll boast of the US and major European countries recognizing Russian annexation of Crimea (and perhaps other territories).
Good point. The aid just ended, and no one is noticing.
To say Trump “seems” to be operating under Russian reflexive control is an understatement. He is functionally a Russian agent as he showed himself to be during his first term and in his “investment life” taking and laundering Russian oligarch money and that only increased during the Great Recession. Current US allies, if they were smart, would not share intelligence or sensitive information once Trump in office as it will surely find its way into Russian hands.
With regard to aid to Ukraine, it will not come from the US. It will have to come from France, Poland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Czechia, and hopefully Germany. Phillips, if the EU had any economic brains (I fear they have been eaten by the Germans in this regard), they would engage in deficit spending, expand the defense industries which would create jobs and economic growth within the EU, and allow for joint borrowing and spending to meet the Russian threat as well as a counterweight to Trump. I know I am preaching to the choir, but this is a win-win opportunity for Europe if they choose tío take it. I have even seen the Finnish PM suggest this course, and fiscally they are quite conservative.
They might have to do that (deficit spend to build military forces) but that will only happen if Trump forces them to by pulling out. I think now that might be good thing
I do not see any other way. Now if we can get the Germans to stop living in Weimar in their economic minds…
There are positive developments. The first EU Defence Commissioner Andrius Kubilius has already asked for a budget of 100 billion euro for defence projects in the EU. Not saving the money will be there instantly though. Slowly, but surely the EU will find its way. And the UK will be part of it hopefully, in some type of cooperation (https://www.politico.eu/article/kubilius-next-budget-should-have-e100-billion-for-defense/).
Thanks for the article. You are masterful at putting things together to make sense—if anything in wars can make sense. I wonder how far Trump will try to weaken NATO. As troubling as his being Putin's echo is here in the US, the question of Europe's defense is up for grabs. Sober times, indeed.
I wish I could like this more than once.
Appreciate that G. Trump has no affection for NATO--dont think he would miss it.
Think back to the Kharkiv offense. If Ukraine had been given sufficient materiel in advance of that offensive then the war would likely have been over by now.
At this point, the Ukrainians need a lot more kit to get the job done because they lack people and so much has been smashed to bits. Yet the west keeps serving up drips and drabs. The Russians are also dying - en masse, with little to show for it.
2025 is likely the year that the Russian economy will start imploding just as the various Soviet depots also run dry of 1950’s junk to send to the front. It could have been the year that re-establishes territorial integrity for Ukraine.
And not that Biden covered himself in glory re: his Ukraine policy but rather that the next guy will be even worse.
Here, Here, Constantin! It is not just about kit in the battle space. I will focus on energy security. While the Russians have hit most large central power plants (fossil and hydro) what can be done is distributed energy and micro grids. These are more resilient to large missile and drone attacks. Also, a big thing the rest of the EU can do is increase the power transfer capability into Ukraine via ENTSO-E projects and also building specific power plants that are designed to feed into Ukraine but are within NATO. It is of course not cheap, but again, it can provide the energy input necessary for Ukraine to keep developing and building the kit they need and it is a win for the EU economies as well.
Thank you for your expertise on this subject. The infrastructure of the former SU is mostly still intact in its former countries, think of the energy grid, pipelines, highways and railroads. I remember travelling by train from Moldova to Romania some years ago, we had to change from the Russian broad gauge to Western rail standards. The method used was by lifting the wagons in the air and change the train chassis.
Arent, you are too kind. I work in power systems and energy and happen to be familiar with all that. It is little understood but oh so crucial. As a member of ENTSO-E, the Slovak threat of cutting power to Ukraine is a non-starter and really an empty threat as it would violate the terms of being part of the EU grid.
As for the old USSR infrastructure, your experience in Romania is one of those examples of why disconnecting from old Russian infrastructure makes so much sense!
Russia is in trouble, but Ukraine is also having its issues with manpower and modern equipment. Ukraine could be helped through this--but so far its not being.
I pick one nit with your post: are Russians really dying en masse? I've been reading that Putin has kept the Russians adjacent to political influence out of the war. Not saying Putin has bottomless resources, but he has militarized the society and shielded any potential opposition from having influence. Ethnic minorities are bearing the brunt.
They are certainly dying in mass numbers. It will be interesting to see if they can keep generating 30k a month (which is the minimum they will need if they are losing 40k+
The Russian federation has lost 400k+ troops to gain less than 0.5% of Ukrainian territory. If that isn’t a sign of strategic failure, I don’t know what is.
Granted, most of these troops are drawn from areas outside the St. Petersburg / Moscow center of the Russian political universe but given Russian birth rates, such losses are simply not sustainable.
Even the N. Korean cannon fodder is not making a difference in Kursk other than giving Ukrainian FPV drone operators ghoulish target training.
Thing is, look at the discontent in the west re inflation and now relativize it to Russia. Imagine a central bank rate at 21%. That makes the Volpe years look like a walk in the park. Inflation is hitting all aspects of the economy and the ruble has already started to slide.
Basically, the Russian economy is headed for a controlled flight into ground and that will affect the folk adjacent to power just as hard, if not harder, than the folk in the provinces.
How dare you! Wildly inaccurate. It's 0.69% of territory last year. At current rates it will Russia a mere 116 years to occupy the remaining 80% of Ukraine, not your unrealistic 160 years. :P
In addition to all your very well made points, people (especially in the commentariat) forget Putin faces a demographic squeeze just like Ukraine.
OK, perhaps money > death
Unfortunately, the American Civil War never ended. Today, aided by the Republican southern strategy, we hear Confederate voices among Trump supporters. We need to keep fighting.
The US Civil War will never end it seems
Not just Confederate voices, but Confederate flags used in the attack on free elections. Now Trump promises to undo the renaming of military bases named for Confederate officers and governors like DeSantis are restoring the fake history of slavery--a history spun by the Daughters of the Confederacy-- to school textbooks.
Take a moment to read this account: https://www.facingsouth.org/2019/04/twisted-sources-how-confederate-propaganda-ended-souths-schoolbooks The Russians could have taken lessons on how to manufacture a Big Lie from these supporters of the "Lost Cause."
Recently I read some articles about how Trump reactions are part of a 'Madman' strategy. This refers to Nixon deliberatedly acting as a madman to confuse foes and allies alike, and that he could do almost anything to achieve his goals. The rationale being that by acting mad he could persuade countries to do as he wanted. With Trump I'm not so sure, it sounds more like a theory than anything. If Trump acts like anyone, it would be like a robber baron.
I think regarding Trump as an opportunistic bully rather than having any kind of strategy would explain most if not all of his behaviour.
Trump's years-long history of saying nice things about Kim, Putin, and XI indicate that he feels a brotherly affinity to these guys. He has often said they are strong men who give strong leadership to their countries. He wants to be just like them—a strong man who gives strong leadership to women, Canada, Greenland, etc.
He certainly does not want the inconvenience of democracy.
Thought why is he being a madman towards US allies--and nice to RUssia. Seems partly preference too.
Or Roy Cohn.
To think now over 7o years on from McCarthy and the Red Scare, we have a Roy Cohn taught Russian stooge in the power. The irony is incredible.
Nixon was a brilliant, if flawed thinker and paranoid insecure bully. Trump is hardly brilliant in that sense, but fits the insecure and bully parts just fine.
The Watergate era was difficult to wade through. The issues that surfaced: Hoover's antics, enemy lists, cover-ups, a criminal Attorney General, and all the rest that unraveled impressed me. I was living in DC and the town was in shock. It took John Dean, one person, to make some sense of everything happening.
I have a feeling we will be revisiting part of this past. One thing I am sure of ... the enemy's list is long. Hopefully, we will also find that one person if needed.
Not just revisiting this part of the past, but also far exceeding those bars of corruption, criminality, lies, disinformation, cover-ups, and naked power grabs that are blatantly unlawful and unconstitutional. Part of our problem is the job of reconciling the rule of law with Watergate was never finished. Allowed to pass with Ford’s pardon of Nixon and subsequent resurrection of Nixon starting with the David Frost interview. It sent a signal that at the highest levels there would be no accountability to the law. This was affirmed with Iran-Contra and then has snowballed from there. Like you, I lived through all these (albeit young at the time of Watergate).
Great point! Thanks for sharing..
Trump is an attention whore - a drama queen. He has a strong desire to be the center of attention at all times.
"Watch what we do instead of what we say." --John Mitchell (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_N._Mitchell)
The problem with it is that it destroys the trust that is foundational to any truly successful organization. Look at Putin's Russia to see where it leads--where those in power routinely tell obvious lies to demonstrate their arrogant impunity, to keep the population confused and subservient.
The Madman Theory has been discredited as a negotiating tool. It might work for a while against dim opponents, along the lines of the teppichfresser model Hitler used. But it didn't win Hitler his war, nor did it help Nixon win his wa. It generally ends with the targets of the Madman Theory developing an implacable rage that can only be extinguished by doing away with the "madman."
Successful nations are those that, as Teddy Roosevelt said, "talk softly and carry a big stick."
Thanks, Phillips, for continuing to offer your thoughts. In my view, it is a mistake to take anything Trump says seriously, and doubly so before the inauguration. Certainly he has always appreciated authoritarians and their narratives. We will see what happens. My preference is for anything that induces the Europeans to grow a pair.
Hi Paul--I agree with any one-off comment. However certain things Trump repeats time and time again (such as the Russian viewpoint on NATO causing the invasion). In that case, I do think its meaningful
We can hope. Obviously Phillips thinks they’ll kneel to Trump.
They certainly will beg in the short term--if he rejects them, maybe they will move on
Unfortunately I think that is the case too. The UK in particular. I hope UK media will press Starmer on why the prosecutor will defer to the convicted felon, but realistically I doubt it.
Here's another round-up from the last week of Ukraine-related events you or may not have heard about.
- There’s been a huge blow to Russian hegemony. And it’s all Putin’s fault for not supporting Armenia.
“The Armenian government approved a draft law on January 9, beginning Armenia's accession process into the EU. ..Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan announced on January 9 that the Armenian government does not object to the law's adoption and noted that the Armenian population must approve the decision on Armenia's possible future EU membership through a referendum.”
https://news.am/eng/news/860685.html
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/01/09/armenia-takes-first-step-to-eu-accession-as-government-approves-bill
- This week, Russian elites proved how clueless they are. And Western journalists repeated the process. Here’s the ISW’s better informed take:
“Russian elites' reported diagnosis of the main problem with Russia's conduct of the war is inaccurate, as Russia's failure to restore maneuver to the battlefield—not a shortage of manpower—is the main factor causing Russia's relatively slow rate of advance. [The] reported focus on mobilizing more personnel indicates that [they] likely view a lack of manpower as Russia's largest constraint… rather than the ineffectiveness of frontline forces, poor campaign-planning abilities of commanders, and significant armored vehicle shortages that Russian forces are currently suffering… Their inability to conduct rapid, mechanized maneuver has prevented Russian forces from converting tactical gains into …the rapid gains, deep penetrations, and significant battlefield victories that the Russian elites likely desire.”
https://www.iswresearch.org/2025/01/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment_9.html
https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/01/09/we-expected-the-war-to-end
- “A hell with all its demons”. How a juvenile detention centre in Taganrog was turned into a torture camp for Ukrainian prisoners:
“Russian opposition outlet Mediazona reported that Russian authorities have been torturing Ukrainian POWs and civilians at the SIZO-2 in Taganrog and reported several accounts from Ukrainian POWs detailing the extent and high frequency of the physical and sexual abuse that the Russian guards inflict on the Ukrainian prisoners.”
https://www.iswresearch.org/2025/01/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment_9.html
https://en.zona.media/article/2025/01/10/hell
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/10/1155491
- Unintentionally humorous event of the week:
“The leaders of the Chechen "Akhmat" Spetsnaz forces and the far-right paramilitary unit "Rusich" Russian Sabotage Assault Reconnaissance Group met on January 6 and promoted a message about Russia's ethnic diversity and harmony.”
Rusich are openly and avowedly Nazis. What a meeting of minds.
https://www.iswresearch.org/2025/01/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment_6.html
PART II
Here’s an aid to Ukraine roundup for everyone who only ever hears about US aid packages:
1. "The EU recently transferred three billion euros (about $3.07 billion) to Ukraine, the first tranche of EU funding from the profits of frozen Russian assets…The G7 Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) Loans initiative will provide a total of $50 billion to Ukraine from the profits of seized Russian assets, including a total of $20 billion from the EU."
https://www.iswresearch.org/2025/01/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment_10.html
2 From Forbes: "…the U.K. government announced 30,000 ‘state-of-the-art, first-person view [FPV] drones’ were being sent to help the fight against Russian aggression and to ‘target enemy positions and armoured vehicles.’ The announcement is part of the Drone Capability Coalition effort to support Ukraine with surveillance and attack drones. Funding for the 30,000 drones comes from UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Latvia and Sweden under a £45m ($55m) contract.
"Perhaps the most significant difference between FPVs and other military hardware is the cost. A U.S.-made Javelin missile, the pinnacle of excellence in anti-tank missiles, costs $202,000, so it can only be supplied in limited numbers. FPVs costing $500 each may be less effective (though the actual effectiveness of the Javelin is seldom discussed) , but can be acquired easily in vast numbers and used against individual enemy soldiers."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2025/01/10/coalition-sends-30000-kamikaze-drones-to-ukraine/
3. Germany will provide even more IRIS-T air defence systems (six) than expected in 2025. These are just as important to Ukraine as the Patriot batteries many NATO members have already supplied.
4. The first state-of-the-art 155-mm automated RCH-155 self-propelled howitzers will also be delivered. The total number of these units, which has already been ordered by the German government, has increased to fifty-four.
5. In addition to all the other artillery initiatives, Germany is now, on its own, supplying 50,000 155mm artillery shells a month. With munitions manufacturing plants opening across Europe, Ukraine no longer faces a repeat of the GOP-inspired shell drought of January-March last year.
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/germany_to_enhance_ukrainian_armed_forces_with_6_iris_t_air_defense_systems_and_first_rch_155_self_propelled_howitzers_exceeding_initial_numbers-13143.html
6. With 300K 30mm shells already provided, Rheinmetall are to deliver 180,000 rounds for the fivty-five highly effective Gepard and six Cheetah anti-aircraft tanks supplied by Germany. Thirteen more of the former and five more of the latter will be delivered in 2025.
7.Thanks to a German circular exchange with Croatia, 30 tanks and 30 infantry fighting vehicles were transferred to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. These are likely M-84 tanks and M-80A infantry fighting vehicles
https://en.defence-ua.com/industries/rheinmetall_to_deliver_180000_rounds_of_the_gepard_hei_t_shells_funded_by_germany-13107.html
8. The first ten of the 200+ next generation Lynx infantry fighting vehicles have already arrived in Ukraine. The same with the next batch of Swedish CV90 IFVs. Like the Rheinmetall Lynx (built in Hungary, go figure), more than 200 of CV90s will be delivered in 2025-26.
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/media_reports_ukraine_receives_10_kf41_lynx_ifvs_from_rheinmetall_not_just_one_why_its_important-13152.html
There is lots of bad news for Russia (Syria too). If Ukraine were helped--the war would be heading towards a Ukrainian victory. However, its not--or not enough.
PART III Under-reported news from the fighting. You’d need a magnifying glass to see any territory gained or lost on a map this week, but there are interesting strategic developments as Ukraine increases its attack on Russian war-fighting capacity.
Jan 7. Ukrainian kamikaze drones set fire to the strategically important Kristal fuel depot at Engels on the Volga River. It still burns today (12th), five days later. It is claimed 800,000 tonnes of specialised T-8V fuel for Russia’s long range Tu-160 supersonic bombers has already gone up in the blaze. Tu-160s last launched cruise missiles at Ukrainian cities and infrastructure on Nov 24th last year.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/ukraine-targets-strategic-bomber-fuel-supplies-in-long-range-strike-on-russia
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/ukraines_strike_on_kristall_oil_depot_can_leave_russian_tu_160s_grounded_without_special_fuel-13128.html
https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1878377870592024962
Jan 7. It was reported that; “On the morning of December 13, when Russia launched nearly 200 drones and more than 90 missiles at Ukraine, a Ukrainian F-16 managed to destroy six missiles in a single combat mission.“ It is uncorroborated so far but, if confirmed, shows the true worth of the F-16's advanced capabilities.
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/ukrainian_f_16_pilot_set_a_historic_record_by_shooting_down_six_missiles_in_one_flight-13117.html
Jan 7. Ukraine struck the command post of the 810th Naval Infantry Brigade in Kursk. A repeat of an attack three weeks ago. The 810th NIB is notorious for its war crimes. Whenever they get the opportunity, Ukraine goes after them.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/01/7/7492414/
Jan 7. Storm Shadow cruise missiles were used to strike at the command post of the Russian 8th Combined Arms Army.
https://www.iswresearch.org/2025/01/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment_8.html
Jan 9. The T-90 is Russia’s most modern battle tank. Soldiers from the 54th Mechanized Brigade recently captured one intact. That single tank represents more than one per cent of Russia’s annual output of new tanks. In 2024, it manufactured only 60-80 of them.
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/ukrainian_forces_capture_modern_russian_t_90s_tank_in_a_strategic_operation_video-13134.html
Jan 9. As ever, according to Russian media, all Ukrainian drones are shot down and never hit their targets. Somehow, ‘falling debris’ seems to do an awful lot of damage. Interestingly, the Cherkizovo Chicken Kingdom, a chicken processing plant in the Kursk oblast suffered just such an unfortunate fate as it burnt to the ground. If it is the start of a wider campaign against Russian food production, things could get interesting. Food shortages are one of Putin’s and the FSB’s biggest fears.
https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1877450425030381858/photo/1
Jan 10. Ukraine launched its largest and widest-ranging drone assault of the war on Russian logistics and key facilities across Russia, attacking at least fifteen targets.
“Strikes have been reported in Melitopol, Berdiansk, Mariupol, and surrounding areas, as well as Taganrog, Anapa, Slavyansk-on-Kuban, Krasnodar, Novorossiysk (the Port of Kavkaz), Voronezh, Kursk, Dzhankoy, Kerch, and Feodosia. These areas include critical infrastructure and logistical hubs, highlighting the strategic intent behind the operation.”
https://en.defence-ua.com/news/russia_faces_its_largest_coordinated_drone_attack_key_hubs_from_krasnodar_to_kerch_are_targeted-13157.html
Jan 11. The Taneko oil refinery in Tatarstan, 1000km from Ukraine was attacked. It too is still ablaze.
https://x.com/KyivPost/status/1878102355326955640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1878102355326955640%7Ctwgr%5E15aeeb6cbf60e4d2e417e2a104f8f713e2b55599%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.twz.com%2Fnews-features%2Fbiden-puts-forward-final-ukraine-military-aid-package-of-his-administration
Thanks for the helpful links, Martin. I watched a video that Dmitri @wartranslated.bsky.social provided on Jan. 6, of the psychopath Alexey Milchakov sitting with members of Akhmat. https://bsky.app/profile/wartranslated.bsky.social/post/3lf3se6izhk2p
"I disagree very vehemently with sending missiles hundreds of miles into Russia. Why are we doing that? We're just escalating this war and making it worse. That should not have been allowed to be done,"
What I am watching is what trump does when his campaign rhetoric meets the reality of the war in Ukraine. It's easy enough to say that US missiles should not be fired into Russian. But how long can you ignore the missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian civilian targets? The wake up call is coming. If Trump really wants to act as a Putin agent then we can certainly define him as one.
He can ignore it as long as he wants, sadly.
Let's assume that on day one Trump rescinds the US authorization to fire US missiles into Russian territory. Will Russia stop too? If yes a victory for Trump diplomacy. If no, a Ukrainian school, apartment building or other soft civilian target gets hit and Trump immediately looks foolish. The situation is what it is and there are no easy chess moves to make.
Both Mike Waltz and Keith Kellogg are making stronger defense statements than Trump. I think as the process moves forward their voices will have more weight.
" how long can you ignore"
How long can those who suffer from apocalyptic fires and hurricanes beyond any historical precedent deny global warming as a "Chinese hoax"? How long can a nation that suffered a million deaths from Covid deny the efficacy of vaccines, with the incoming Administration signaling it wants to do away with even the polio vaccine? How long can a nation which has claimed for over 200 years to believe in the fundamental equality of human beings--regularly invoking the gospels to justify its actions-- continue to provide substandard education, medical services, and justice to over half of its population?
The denial will continue until reality forcefully rebukes it.
This is how you resolve issues. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whisky_War
Sadly, wont work with Putin....
Thanks for this interesting article, Christian. "Casualties and losses -- None."
"Velkommen til den danske ø". And have a bottle of Schnapps while you're at it!
If Trump does, in fact, restrict or drop aid for Ukraine and the EU follows suit, as good lap dogs do, then I think it very likely that Ukraine will double down on developing nuclear weapons. Any "negotiation" with Putin, even for a limited ceasefire, will only give Russia time to re-arm and re-train a field army. The same holds true for a "peace" that sees Ukraine acqiesce to giving up 20% of their territory. It's only putting off renewed Russian aggression at a later date. It's a tragedy that the West (and Ukraine!) finds itself in this position because a firm military response in 2023-24 could have seen Putin's defeat. Ukraine is already sensing the growing disillusionment on the part of its western allies and what that portends for the future. That "future", as an independent state, is in danger and their options (thanks to the latest political developments in the U.S. and Europe) are fast becoming more limited. What else can they do?
They are probably a longer way from nukes than we realize. Im sure they are thinking about it though.
Robert Kagan wrote a long and powerful analysis of Ukraine's prospects in the Atlantic. It is stark and dreary: he believes Putin will win the war in 12-18 months in brutal fashion if Trump doesn't reverse course.
Claire Berlinski and others have greatly excerpted the article here on substack.
Phillips, hope you will comment on this important and disturbing piece.
BTW, it was telling that the piece slipped quickly from the "most read" list on the Atlantic. Most people in U.S. don't want to think about Ukraine's burden anymore. In most reflection pieces on Biden's presidency, Ukraine is getting a sentence or two.
I think the article was overly dramatic, and written to try and push the Trump people to aid Ukraine. It underestimated Russian weakness and discounted the European ability to make a difference. Ukraine is not in great shape--but if Europe helps, it can persevere even without the USA.
I'm old; my memory is shot to hell. So I don't recall specifics, but do recall thinking that Kagan overstated Ukraine's weakness and, as you note, understated Russia's vulnerabilities. Scanning the article again, I was reminded of a few passages that might spark others here to read the article and come to their own conclusions; here's a link to gifted article: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2025/01/trump-putin-ukraine-russia-war/681228/?gift=AKbSn4toAaj1yz4qa1r_JGsCBjYKKtfQHBf8zieDnSE&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
A couple passages based on Kagan's assumption that Ukraine will be toast by the end of this year and understatement of Ukrainian resolve/nascent defense production of its own/probable limited but much needed EU support and his casting Putin as a man in no hurry:
"Some hopeful souls argue that Putin will be more flexible once talks begin. But this is based on the mistaken assumption that Putin believes he needs a respite from the fighting. He doesn’t. Yes, the Russian economy is suffering. Yes, Russian losses at the front remain staggeringly high. Yes, Putin lacks the manpower both to fight and to produce vital weaponry and is reluctant to risk political upheaval by instituting a full-scale draft. If the war were going to drag on for another two years or more, these problems might eventually force Putin to seek some kind of truce, perhaps even the kind of agreement Americans muse about. But Putin thinks he’s going to win sooner than that, and he believes that Russians can sustain their present hardships long enough to achieve victory."
........
"That is the key point: Putin sees the timelines working in his favor. Russian forces may begin to run low on military equipment in the fall of 2025, but by that time Ukraine may already be close to collapse. Ukraine can’t sustain the war another year without a new aid package from the United States. Ukrainian forces are already suffering from shortages of soldiers, national exhaustion, and collapsing morale. Russia’s casualty rate is higher than Ukraine’s, but there are more Russians than Ukrainians, and Putin has found a way to keep filling the ranks, including with foreign fighters. As one of Ukraine’s top generals recently observed, “the number of Russian troops is constantly increasing.” This year, he estimates, has brought 100,000 additional Russian troops to Ukrainian soil. Meanwhile, lack of equipment prevents Ukraine from outfitting reserve units."
I sure like your "people make up your own minds" suggestion. This is no easy call, even among pro-Ukraine ppl who steadfastly urge Russia's defeat. All of Kagan's arguments are solid and plausible, IMO. Yet it is possible that he is simply wrong on UKR's durability, as Phillips believes. I don't buy that Kagan is JUST artfully making arguments to persuade the incoming Trump government, even if that is his key objective. Kagan's fears of a UKR defeat are sincere IMO.
Most of us here seem to agree that Putin won't sign any worthwhile deal, as your quotations argue. But this is a separate issue from UKR's actual sustainability.
I agree that Kagan's concerns are sincere - and all too plausible. I guess my main criticism is that his "Ukraine can't endure" argument repeats so much of the media narrative over the past 18 months or more. Naive and perhaps dangerous but I continue to hope that Ukraine can prevail, however the Ukrainians define that word. As Emily Dickinson wrote,
“Hope” is the thing with feathers -
That perches in the soul -
And sings the tune without the words -
And never stops - at all"
Thanks for highlighting that article. I too read it last week and wondered how our favorite substacker would respond.
see comment above!
Just to add a little detail: Kagan measures Putin's hand to be objectively strong, with putin likely feeling invincible. The notion that Putin would ever agree to a useful peace deal is not just wrong, it's absurd.
You'd have to read the article for details of how Putin can likely manage the pressures he faces and persevere to victory. (I think the Atlantic allows 1 free article read per month.)
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2025/01/trump-putin-ukraine-russia-war/681228/
I added a gifted link in my reply to Phillips' comment on the article.
Thanks for this. Assuming then that Ukraine's use of allied supplied, long range weapons stops and they concentrate more on refining their own Neptune technology, what's to stop European NATO members from aiding that effort substantially? Maybe they already are for all I know.
Could a Trump led US torpedo that effort?
Ukraine produced 6,000 long range drones last year. Plans to build an order of magnitude more this year. The same with Neptunes. They now use cheap drones to exhaust Russian air defences then hit their target with Neptunes. All of that without even European aid. The US can do nothing about that.
So far they have been reluctant to do anything the USA doesnt want them to do--and Trump will probably try to use that.
I believe it is highly likely that Trump is directly as well as indirectly under Putin's control. I became convinced of this after seeing Trump's extraordinary body language during the 16 July 2018 Helsinki summit. His facial expressions in particular directly after his 2 hour closed door meeting with Putin - no aides present, just one interpreter for each - exhibited what I interpreted to be naked shame and guilt. They were remarkable expressions and I have never seen them on Trump's face since. This is where I believe Putin insisted that Trump humiliate himself publicly by contradicting his own US intelligence agencies and say there was no reason for Russia to meddle in the 2016 election. "President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be." Trump is not just a Russian asset, he's under Putin's direct control. And Putin is clever enough to disguise this by having Trump occasionally go against Russian interest, when directed. Yes, circumstantial evidence, subjective as well. But this is what my gut tells me. There are more kinds of evidence - Trump's personal seizing of his interpreter's notes after a meeting with Putin, his insistence no aides be present at some of these meetings, his secret phone calls with Putin both while in and out of office... but those incredible facial expressions on July 16, 2018 convinced me. Of course, I hope I'm wrong. (And yes, perhaps it was Trump's ego - rather than Putin's insistence - which wouldn't allow him to admit Putin helped put him into the presidency. Perhaps.)
Am I wrong in thinking that it has been a while since russia launched a major attack on Ukkraines energy infrastructure. The people in Kyiv I follow were mentioning blackouts a month ago but not recently. Has the russian terror campaign failed again this winter?
Ukraines missile campaign on strategic assets seems to increasing substantially in the last few weeks.
Good question. I know that Russia continues to use drone attacks on cities, but it seems like Ukraine does a pretty good job of shooting them down. Last I recall, I think that Russian missile attacks on cities had reduced in number, and speculation was that they were possibly accumulating weapons for a major strike. Or maybe they are just having trouble feeding the beast of war.