nangyale
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 31, 2010
- Messages
- 2,251
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Russia might very soon do something rather counter-intuitive: nothing at all
All the signs are that the freaks in Kiev have decided to put down the demonstrations in Kharkov, Donetsk and Lugansk by force. YouTube is full of amateur footage showing all sorts of militarized units, APCs and even artillery pieces being moved towards these cities. Local people have tried to stop them, but without success. It appears that the attacking force will include loyal cops from other cities, regular military units, private contractors hired by the oligarchs, riot police, "anti-terrorist" units of the SBU and volunteers from the Right Sector.
Facing them are crowds of largely unarmed or minimally armed civilians. In Lugansk some of these civilians have looted the SBU armory and have assault rifles (AKM-74s). The crowds are relatively large, but not huge, most of the local activists have taken up positions inside key government buildings which they occupy and while there are some barricades around these buildings, they do not appear to be properly defended, at least not in a military sense.
This all reminds me of Moscow in 1993 and it scares me. Badly.
For those of you who do not remember, let me remind you of what happened then.
In 1993 the Russian Parliament building was defended pretty much in the same way as the buildings in eastern Kiev are: all sorts of supporters outside the building, but the core defenders inside. Once the shooting began, the crowd of sympathizers outside rapidly dispersed. Shortly after the building itself was assaulted an offer was made to those willing surrender to let them out safely. Some accepted. Others stayed. The assault of the building resumed and the bloodbath which took place inside was hidden from the public. As for those who surrendered, they were hunted down while leaving the area, beat up and often murdered. Finally, the winning side engaged in a massive hunt for Parliament-sympathizers who were hunted down, arrested, beat up and even killed for a least a week. Something very similar might happen in the next few days in eastern Ukraine.
Cops will be used to clear the vicinity of the buildings. Then APCs will be brought in and after some gunfire exchange, the attacking force will be given the option to come out and surrender. Some will accept, others will refuse. Those who will surrender will be handed over to the SBU and Right Sector thugs to be tortured, beat up and jailed. Then a full scale assault, supported by 30mm gunfire with incendiaries will take place. As soon as the lower floors will be cleared of resisting people, the private security contractors and Right Sector thugs will move in to kill the remaining people. Finally, the official regime media will announce that 10 or 15 "terrorist" have been killed, and that law and order has been restored. This version will be fully endorsed by the western corporate media while western politicians will say that they "understand" that the "government" had to act, they will blame Russia for instigating the violence, and they will urge thefreaks in Kiev "legitimate Ukrainian government" to use "dialog with all parties" and "show restraint". They might even do what the USA did with Israel and praise the regime for its "restraint". Away from the public eye a massive campaign of arrests will result in most pro-Russian activists sent to jail on chargers of terrorism, armed rebellion, sedition and sabotage of the Ukraine's territorial integrity and independence. They will face 15+ years in jail (though the rump-Parliament in Kiev wants to pass a law making this a mandatory life sentence crime).
This worked in 1993 and this will work in 2014.
Many will then wonder if Russia will step in and send in troops. And a few days later, even more will wonder why Russia has not already intervened.
This is what I will attempt to explain (assuming events go as I predicted above).
The first thing to understand is that this scenario, while horrible and disgusting, does not meet the criteria of "mass violence" at least as seen from the Kremlin. Even if, say 100 or 200 people die, this is not much in comparison to the full population in the Ukraine. Furthermore, Putin will have to weigh the number of people murdered in such a crackdown against the likely number of casualties should the Russian military intervene.
Today Putin said something very interesting during a public meeting with members of his Popular Front. He said that before intervening in Crimea Russian special services had covertly organized an opinion poll to gauge the popular opinion in Crimea and that they had concluded that roughly 80% of the people wanted Crimea to become part of Russia (this is a very smart use of special services, by the way!). He added that once the referendum was announced and the campaign began, these figures rose to almost 97%, but that initially, at that time, 80% was the secret Russian estimate.
We can be pretty darn sure that the Russian special services are also actively conducting such covert opinion polls today. What we don't know is what their surveys shows. What I will say though is this: while I am confident that "many" people in the east want to join Russia, I am not at all sure that they are the majority. Also, I strongly suspect a sizable minority who would be vehemently opposed to such a solution. Furthermore, I am quite confident that there is a minority, however small, how is actually very much in favor of the new regime in Kiev. Yes, sure, most people in the East are sick and tired of the Nazi freak show in Kiev, but "most" is not at all the same as "all" or even a "strong majority". The bottom line is this:
The Donbass is not Crimea.
In Crimea it was pretty clear cut. The picture is much more complex in the eastern Ukraine.
The geography is also dramatically different. Crimea is a peninsula joined to the rest of Ukraine by a rather narrow stretch of land. It was rather obvious for the Russian forces to see where to stop. But where should they stop in the eastern Ukraine?
This is not a military problem. In military terms, the Russian military could take over all of the Ukraine. This is political problem: to which area do you limit your intervention? Only in Lugansk? Or also in Donetsk and Kharkov? What about Nikolaev? There are lots of anti-regime people there. Ditto for Odessa. Then comes the "plat de resistance" - Dnepropetrоvsk, with over one million people inside, many opposed to Russia. Shall the Russian military also take that major urban center? At what cost in human lives?
Take a look at this very detailed map of the Ukraine (it is a big file, you will have to click on it to zoom in for a better resolution):
[In fact, this file is so big (about 10MB) that those who are interested might want to download this (very good) map from here]
All the signs are that the freaks in Kiev have decided to put down the demonstrations in Kharkov, Donetsk and Lugansk by force. YouTube is full of amateur footage showing all sorts of militarized units, APCs and even artillery pieces being moved towards these cities. Local people have tried to stop them, but without success. It appears that the attacking force will include loyal cops from other cities, regular military units, private contractors hired by the oligarchs, riot police, "anti-terrorist" units of the SBU and volunteers from the Right Sector.
Facing them are crowds of largely unarmed or minimally armed civilians. In Lugansk some of these civilians have looted the SBU armory and have assault rifles (AKM-74s). The crowds are relatively large, but not huge, most of the local activists have taken up positions inside key government buildings which they occupy and while there are some barricades around these buildings, they do not appear to be properly defended, at least not in a military sense.
This all reminds me of Moscow in 1993 and it scares me. Badly.
For those of you who do not remember, let me remind you of what happened then.
In 1993 the Russian Parliament building was defended pretty much in the same way as the buildings in eastern Kiev are: all sorts of supporters outside the building, but the core defenders inside. Once the shooting began, the crowd of sympathizers outside rapidly dispersed. Shortly after the building itself was assaulted an offer was made to those willing surrender to let them out safely. Some accepted. Others stayed. The assault of the building resumed and the bloodbath which took place inside was hidden from the public. As for those who surrendered, they were hunted down while leaving the area, beat up and often murdered. Finally, the winning side engaged in a massive hunt for Parliament-sympathizers who were hunted down, arrested, beat up and even killed for a least a week. Something very similar might happen in the next few days in eastern Ukraine.
Cops will be used to clear the vicinity of the buildings. Then APCs will be brought in and after some gunfire exchange, the attacking force will be given the option to come out and surrender. Some will accept, others will refuse. Those who will surrender will be handed over to the SBU and Right Sector thugs to be tortured, beat up and jailed. Then a full scale assault, supported by 30mm gunfire with incendiaries will take place. As soon as the lower floors will be cleared of resisting people, the private security contractors and Right Sector thugs will move in to kill the remaining people. Finally, the official regime media will announce that 10 or 15 "terrorist" have been killed, and that law and order has been restored. This version will be fully endorsed by the western corporate media while western politicians will say that they "understand" that the "government" had to act, they will blame Russia for instigating the violence, and they will urge the
This worked in 1993 and this will work in 2014.
Many will then wonder if Russia will step in and send in troops. And a few days later, even more will wonder why Russia has not already intervened.
This is what I will attempt to explain (assuming events go as I predicted above).
The first thing to understand is that this scenario, while horrible and disgusting, does not meet the criteria of "mass violence" at least as seen from the Kremlin. Even if, say 100 or 200 people die, this is not much in comparison to the full population in the Ukraine. Furthermore, Putin will have to weigh the number of people murdered in such a crackdown against the likely number of casualties should the Russian military intervene.
Today Putin said something very interesting during a public meeting with members of his Popular Front. He said that before intervening in Crimea Russian special services had covertly organized an opinion poll to gauge the popular opinion in Crimea and that they had concluded that roughly 80% of the people wanted Crimea to become part of Russia (this is a very smart use of special services, by the way!). He added that once the referendum was announced and the campaign began, these figures rose to almost 97%, but that initially, at that time, 80% was the secret Russian estimate.
We can be pretty darn sure that the Russian special services are also actively conducting such covert opinion polls today. What we don't know is what their surveys shows. What I will say though is this: while I am confident that "many" people in the east want to join Russia, I am not at all sure that they are the majority. Also, I strongly suspect a sizable minority who would be vehemently opposed to such a solution. Furthermore, I am quite confident that there is a minority, however small, how is actually very much in favor of the new regime in Kiev. Yes, sure, most people in the East are sick and tired of the Nazi freak show in Kiev, but "most" is not at all the same as "all" or even a "strong majority". The bottom line is this:
The Donbass is not Crimea.
In Crimea it was pretty clear cut. The picture is much more complex in the eastern Ukraine.
The geography is also dramatically different. Crimea is a peninsula joined to the rest of Ukraine by a rather narrow stretch of land. It was rather obvious for the Russian forces to see where to stop. But where should they stop in the eastern Ukraine?
This is not a military problem. In military terms, the Russian military could take over all of the Ukraine. This is political problem: to which area do you limit your intervention? Only in Lugansk? Or also in Donetsk and Kharkov? What about Nikolaev? There are lots of anti-regime people there. Ditto for Odessa. Then comes the "plat de resistance" - Dnepropetrоvsk, with over one million people inside, many opposed to Russia. Shall the Russian military also take that major urban center? At what cost in human lives?
Take a look at this very detailed map of the Ukraine (it is a big file, you will have to click on it to zoom in for a better resolution):
[In fact, this file is so big (about 10MB) that those who are interested might want to download this (very good) map from here]
Last edited: