Vladimir Putin has “made a decision” and there will be “severe punishment” following Ukraine’s incursion into Russia, according to the Russian ambassador to the US.
Mr Putin was clearly frustrated at the Ukrainian incursion, but a ruthless Russian military response was only one option. Ukraine is short of military capability - soldiers and weapons - and it appears that they have deployed up to 10,000 soldiers (probably battle-hardened) into Russian territory. This “fixes” these Ukrainian forces well away from the frontline Russian action in the Donbas.
Mr Putin knows that progress on the frontline will slow when winter arrives, so his forces have perhaps 10 to 12 weeks remaining to achieve the objectives of his so-called Special Military Operation. By focusing on Russian main effort in the Donbas, Mr Putin knows that Ukraine has diluted the forces available to resist the Russian assault towards Pokrovsk, which might enable greater progress in the limited time available.
Once Russia’s objectives in the Donbas have been achieved, Mr Putin might consider that he can address the Kursk incursion in slower time.
What could ‘severe punishment’ mean?
Based on the way Russia reacted to provocations in the past, I’m not expecting a dramatic response myself. At the same time, sooner or later a line will be crossed where Russia will be forced to show that further escalation will not be tolerated. The war in Ukraine itself is an example of a response to a red line finally being crossed. It’s hard to say whether Kursk is another such line.
I have to be honest short of uniformed NATO troops (or say 50,000 non-uniformed but clearly NATO troops) marching into the battlefield I just don’t see it happening.
Even if they let Ukraine launch their F-16s from Poland I’m convinced all that would happen would be Russia carefully targeting that portion of the Polish airfield with hypersonic missiles and nothing more. No nuclear, no escalation to wide-spread bombing of Poland. It would all be very contained and obvious tit-for-tat that isn’t even escalation.
I think the west is going to continue salami-slicing their way to do whatever short of direct large-scale NATO troop involvement.
Latest reporting says Ukraine will be allowed to use US ATACMs and other long-range western supplied and operated missiles to strike deep into Russia. I don’t think this will change Russia’s behavior, they’ll continue to try and destroy such things but they don’t have the global massive surveillance network of satellites and other things that the US has so it still takes time to find and destroy these, it won’t be sped up by them doing that. Russia is not going to get suddenly angry and pull a bunch of extra missile production capacity and usage out of nowhere and throw it at Ukraine, I think it looks like they’re already committing their forces to the degree they feel comfortable with given the threat of a wider war necessitating some reserves still be maintained.
So gradually as the situation worsens for Ukraine they’re going to be allowed to inflict worse and worse attacks on Russian civilians which is fine and beloved by western planners as a way they think to undermine support for Putin and terrorize the Russian people into submission or at least punish them enough they and others looking on will never dare rise against them again.
Both Russia and the west have accepted the idea of a long war of attrition. The west’s job in their mind is to make that war as miserable for Russian people as possible, to inflict as much damage on Russia, to bleed them as much as they can before the fighting stops. And the west I still think holds out hope that they will pull more production out and be able to supply Ukraine enough they can force a stalemate which they can count as a win.
More than that though they just can’t back down. The Democratic side and their bourgeoisie have doubled down on attacking Russia, I mean they’re arresting former weapons inspectors and searching the homes of conservative Nixon political magazine acolytes because they’re too close to Russia and they want to slap them with FARA violations. Now if Trump gets into office there is a slim chance he just winds it down because there are other voices who want Iran, who want China and don’t think this war with Russia was the right way to go (for that it’s worth it certainly seems the FBI and the security state have fully thrown themselves behind the Democrat’s plan as opposed to that of Republicans or perhaps the Democrats have chosen the plan they most wanted enacted). There’s also the chance he demands Russia make peace with unacceptable terms and escalates too but I just don’t see anything but at BEST a slow war with the gloves off by the west until Ukraine’s ranks fully break and they are routed under Kamala with the possibility she does her cop act and turns up the heat all the way to direct war.
I mean the reality is that none of these provocations are going to change the direction of the conflict. Given that, it makes sense why Russia doesn’t want things to escalate in a significant way since it would require more resources on Russia’s part, and would introduce unpredictability. If things keep going the way they are, Russia will win the war, and it’s looking like that might happen within months now.
The primary goal of stunts like Kursk incursion is to convince western public that Ukraine still hasn’t lost the war. For example, here’s how the polling in US changed as a result
However, in terms of actual military strategy, this was a terrible move because it further accelerated the fall of Donbas. Once Russia splits the front in two between the north and the south, then it’s gg well played for Ukraine. They will end up in two big cauldrons, and they will not be able to reinforce each other. The supply lines to the south will be completely cut as well. This will be the start of the general collapse of the AFU. I think this was always the plan, but Kursk sped things up significantly.
This has been the general trend throughout the war incidentally. Ukraine is always forced to hold territory long past the time it should’ve retreated because they’re fighting a media circus. Russian army is free to make decisions without having to worry about the optics. This gives Russia a massive strategic advantage in the war.
Meanwhile, with regards to the west, Russia’s been taking an asymmetric approach. They’re strengthening their economic alliances with the Global South, and getting countries to join BRICS. They’re now creating military alliances with DRPK and Iran, and pushing the west out of Africa and Syria. While the west is fixating on Ukraine, the empire is getting squeezed out from the rest of the world. In a sense, there’s a much bigger global war of attrition happening between the west and the rest right now, and the west is losing it.
For example, here’s how the polling in US changed as a result
Huh, the average AmeriKKKan is even more braindead than I thought. I guess you learn something new each day (and the west will never fail to disappoint)
I wonder if the west perceived Ukraine as a win-win for them in that they thought either Ukraine loses and they have all they need to then manufacture consent for direct war with Russia, or they win and NATO completes it’s objective and is on Russia’s doorstep now. Obviously that’s irresponsible and crazy to us but we don’t think in Empire Logic. Tfw when your state wages a war of attrition and starts atrophying :O
If the Ukrainians think that Russia is doing crimes against Ukrainians now just wait and see what crimes the blue helmets are gonna start doing in Ukraine when they’re brought in.
ive been reading “Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam” and at some point the author points out that anti war people before the amerikkkan war in Vietnam predicted that North Vietnam would be the most bombed country in history but it actually ended up being South Vietnam their own supposed allies. Having amerikkkans “defend” “you” is probably worse than literally nothing.
The reaction to kursk will not be flashy. It will simply be another cold change of rules.
New targets targeted by cruise missiles, harsher terms for Ukrainian surrender.
We saw this after Ukraine took advantage of Russian withdrawal from kiev breaking the tacit agreement of having peace talks in exchange for the withdrawal. Russia kept attacking and stopped accepting peace talks where Ukraine doesnt accept their terms.
We saw this after Ukraine retook kharkov and attacked the kerch bridge (crimea was not part of the fighting area). Russia started punishing Ukrainian power transmission capacity.
That’s my thinking as well. I am actually kinda expecting them to do something as they had been responding to attacks on their refineries and looking at the ammount of refinneries, air bases and other things that have been hit recently toghether with the whole Kursk incursion and the west giving green light for the use of their weapons inside Russia, they kinda of are pressed to do what could be the biggest attack since the war started, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they just pretend nothing of this happened too and just continue pushing in the east as they may think they will win soon.
But if they do actually do something perhaps they could take the opportunity to do it at the same time as Iran and Yemen, and even others as well, to really show that a red line has been crossed.
Exactly, Russia always has the option of asymmetric response. The people who need to know will know, while that won’t escalate the conflict in the eyes of the general public. For example, this might be part of the response https://apnews.com/article/turkey-russia-patrols-syria-ypg-assad-89fcd22474497bff737b87ae6b214b3e
If US backed rebels get cleared out in Syria, then US bases there will become untenable, and US will lose control over the refineries and food producing regions. The oil that US steals from Syria goes directly to Israel, and losing that would create logistics problems for both.
