Moon of Alabama Brecht quote

Monthly Archives

May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 18, 2025

Palestine Open Thread 2025-109

News & views related to the war in Palestine ...

Posted by b at 12:01 UTC | Comments (59)

Ukraine Open Thread 2025-108

News & views related to the war in Ukraine ...

Posted by b at 12:00 UTC | Comments (112)

The MoA Week In Review - OT 2025-107

Last week's posts on Moon of Alabama:

---
Other issues:

Cont. reading: The MoA Week In Review - OT 2025-107

Posted by b at 11:59 UTC | Comments (80)

May 16, 2025

Ukraine - Negotiation Failure Plus Other Items

After some diplomatic gyrations, talks between the Russian Federation and Ukraine took place today in Istanbul, Turkey.

The Russian side had sent largely same delegation which had negotiated with Ukraine in March and April 2022. It sees the current negotiations as a continuation of the older ones, provided that new facts on the ground are taken into account.

The Ukrainian delegation was headed by its Minister of Defense Rustem Umerov. Its task was to demand an immediate ceasefire and to prepare a meeting between the presidents of the two countries.

The talks ended after just two hours.

The Russian side is said to have demanded a Ukrainian retreat from the four oblast the Russians have largely conquered and integrated into their country.

The Ukrainian side demanded an immediate ceasefire, the return of children the Russians had removed from the areas involved in military operations and the exchange of all prisoners (of which Russia has many more than Ukraine). It is obvious that Ukrainian side is not interested (yet) in making peace.

Both sides rejected the other side's demands and that was it. For now ...

The balance of power in the war is clearly on the Russian side. The Ukrainian army will thus continue to bleed and lose on the battlefield.

---

Another exchange of dead soldiers also occurred today. Thirty four corpse of Russia soldiers were exchanged against 909 Ukrainian ones. The rather absurd relation of 1 to 27 has been the case for quite a while. Indeed it seems that Russian side has limited the number of Ukrainian corpses it is willing to release per exchange to 909.


bigger

There are three reasons that contribute to the strong divergence of the numbers of dead on each side.

  • For the Ukrainian side the evacuation of dead (and wounded) soldiers is not a priority.
  • The Russian side is moving forwards winning control of areas that the Ukrainian side has lost. This allows to collect all dead while not being under fire.
  • The Ukrainian losses are in general much higher than the Russian ones.
---

Lieutenant-General Andrey Mordvichev, who the Ukrainians had claimed to have killed on March 19 2022, has become the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces in the rank of a Colonel-General.

---

The Ukrainian government 'lost' over $700 million buying arms and munitions which were never delivered or unusable.

How Ukraine lost hundreds of millions on arms deals gone wrong (archived) - Financial Times, May 16 2025
Desperate to source munitions, Kyiv paid foreign brokers for weapons and shells that were sometimes unusable or never arrived

A Financial Times investigation, based on leaked Ukrainian state documents, court filings and dozens of interviews with procurement officials, weapons dealers and manufacturers, and detectives, has uncovered how hundreds of millions of dollars Kyiv paid to foreign arms intermediaries to secure vital military equipment has gone to waste over the past three years of war.
...
To date, Ukraine has paid out $770mn in advance to foreign arms brokers for weapons and ammunition that have not been delivered, according to figures from Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence, as well as documents seen by the FT.
...

Most the deals have (presumably) involved large bribes.

Posted by b at 14:04 UTC | Comments (454)

May 15, 2025

Palestine Open Thread 2025-106

News & views related to the war in Palestine ...

Posted by b at 12:14 UTC | Comments (220)

Ukraine Open Thread 2025-105

News & views related to the war in Ukraine ...

Posted by b at 12:13 UTC | Comments (298)

Open (Neither Ukraine Nor Palestine) Thread 2025-104

News & views not related to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine ...

Posted by b at 12:13 UTC | Comments (202)

May 14, 2025

In Saudi Arabia Trump Rejects Interventionism, Regime-Change Schemes

Foreign policy statements by the Trump administration continue to surprise.

At the end of January Secretary of State Marco Rubio made remarks that strongly diverged from decades of U.S. policy. He did away with 'unipolarity' - the assumed leading role of the U.S. in global policy - and acknowledged and endorsed a multi-polar world.

He set a limit to U.S. intervention by acknowledging the legitimate interests of others:

The way the world has always worked is that the Chinese will do what’s in the best interests of China, the Russians will do what’s in the best interest of Russia, the Chileans are going to do what’s in the best interest of Chile, and the United States needs to do what’s in the best interest of the United States. Where our interests align, that’s where you have partnerships and alliances; where our differences are not aligned, that is where the job of diplomacy is to prevent conflict while still furthering our national interests and understanding they’re going to further theirs. And that’s been lost.

Rubio wants to reintroduce that concept:

And I think that was lost at the end of the Cold War, because we were the only power in the world, and so we assumed this responsibility of sort of becoming the global government in many cases, trying to solve every problem. And there are terrible things happening in the world. There are. And then there are things that are terrible that impact our national interest directly, and we need to prioritize those again. So it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power. That was not – that was an anomaly. It was a product of the end of the Cold War, but eventually you were going to reach back to a point where you had a multipolar world, multi-great powers in different parts of the planet. We face that now with China and to some extent Russia, and then you have rogue states like Iran and North Korea you have to deal with.

That was a great (if very late), and astonishing insight from the U.S. secretary responsible for foreign policy. Especially from one who had been previously affiliated with the neo-conservative movement.

President Trump is currently visiting the Arab states along the Persian Gulf. His main effort there is to collect tribute in from of weapon and investment deals given in exchange for 'security'. In that he is continuing the protection racket that has been a main aspect of U.S. global policy since the end of World War II.

But during a speech (video) at the Saudi-U.S.investment forum, he also entered new territory. He took fifteen minutes to laud his host and to rumble about his own 'achievements'. He lauded the crown price Mohammad bin Salman and other Gulf rulers to then jump, twenty minutes in, into a critique of previous(?) U.S. 'regime change' behavior.

The White House does not provide a transcript of the 50 minute long speech, only short excerpts. But a full transcript is available here.

Here are the excerpts that point to new policies:

Cont. reading: In Saudi Arabia Trump Rejects Interventionism, Regime-Change Schemes

Posted by b at 14:37 UTC | Comments (229)

May 13, 2025

Uncertainty Of Future Tariffs Continues To Hamstring Economy

On April 2 President Donald Trump declared "Liberation Day," announcing a new tariff strategy aimed at allegedly correcting trade imbalances and protecting U.S. workers and industries.

It was the wrong medicine for misdiagnosed illness. Internal U.S. economic problems are caused by legal incentives for financial speculation and disincentives to produce goods people need. Tariffs won't solve that problem.

The tariff rates Trump introduced were ignoring economic realities. The whole economic concept behind was based on some advisors weird theory. It was obvious that the whole Trump strategy implemented through tariffs would fail.

China and other pushed back against U.S. tariffs by introducing some on their own. The markets reacted appropriately. The values of the U.S. dollar, U.S. stock markets and U.S. treasuries decreased.

By April 9 Trump was forced to pull back. He paused the tariffs for most countries for 90 days but increased tariffs on China.

China responded in kind. 

Three days later Trump announced another retreat. Smartphones and computers were excluded from the previously introduced tariffs.

Speculators may well have liked the uncertainty Trump's irresponsible tariff tactics introduced into financial markets. But for markets of real goods uncertainty is a venom that blocks all activities. It soon became obvious that the tariffs would cause huge problems for the U.S. economy.

Trump tried to press China to concede to U.S. terms in some new trade deal. But China rejected all talks until tariffs were reestablished at the previous levels.

That concession was made. Talks over the weekend in Geneva saw the U.S., again, pulling back.

The editors of the Wall Street Journal don't hold back in their comment:

Rarely has an economic policy been repudiated as soundly, and as quickly, as President Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs—and by Mr. Trump’s own hand. Witness the agreement Monday morning to scale back his punitive tariffs on China—his second major retreat in less than a week. This is a win for economic reality, and for American prosperity.

Make that a partial win for reality. The Administration agreed to scrap most of the 145% tariff Mr. Trump imposed on Chinese goods on April 2 and later. What remains is his new 10% global base-line tariff, plus the separate 20% levy putatively tied to China’s role in the fentanyl trade, for a total rate of 30%. In exchange, Beijing will reduce its retaliatory tariff to 10% from 125%. The deal is good for 90 days to start, as negotiations continue.

And therein, I believe, still lies the big problem.

The editors conclude:

The 30% tariff is still exceptionally high for a major trading partner, but the 90-day rollback spares both sides from what looked like an impending economic crackup. U.S. consumers were facing widespread shortages, while China feared growing unemployment.

For now, nothing will change with those symptoms.

It is not only the very high 30% tariff (for mostly products with very low profit margins) that will prevent Chinese factories from resuming production and U.S. retailers from restocking their shelves.

The poison that still paralyses everything is the uncertainty and insecurity that comes with the 90 days limit of the deal and with no perspective of what might follow. Who will post orders for, let's say return-to-school items, if it is unknown what price will have to be paid for them?

Paul Krugman agrees:

The prohibitive tariff has been paused, not canceled. Nobody knows what will happen in 90 days. I’ve long argued that the uncertainty created by Trump’s arbitrary, ever-changing tariffs is at least as important as the level of those tariffs. Well, the uncertainty level has arguably gone up rather than down.

This retreat probably hasn’t come soon enough to avoid high prices and empty shelves. Even if shipments from Shanghai to Los Angeles — which had come to a virtual halt — were to resume tomorrow, stuff wouldn’t arrive in time to avoid exhaustion of current inventories.

I guess it’s good news that Trump slammed on the brakes before driving completely off the cliff. But if you think that rationality has returned to the policy process, that the days of government by ignorant whim are now behind us, you’ll be sorely disappointed.

I agree with that take.

Posted by b at 16:26 UTC | Comments (218)

May 12, 2025

An Immediate Peace Is The Best One Ukraine Can Ever Get

The attritional war in Ukraine is moving towards a new phase. The Ukrainian army is crumbling but its leadership, with the support of some Europeans, is unwilling to concede its defeat.

There are still very unrealistic views in the West about the losses and capabilities in this conflict. They prevent those who have them from acknowledging the urgent need for peace negotiations. 

In a new analysis Alex Vershinin, an expert from RUSI, provides sound arguments and numbers for those who support an immediate end of the war.

In military circles Vershinin is a well known capacity:

Lt Col (Retd) Alex Vershinin has 10 years of frontline experience in Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. For the last decade before his retirement, he worked as a modelling and simulations officer in concept development and experimentation for NATO and the US Army.

Vershinin is working for the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), the official think tank of the British military. His experience with modeling and simulations allows him to take the 'big picture' view.

In June 2022 RUSI published his piece on The Return of Industrial Warfare (Jun 17 2022) in which he warned about of lack of an industrial base in the West to sustain a war in Ukraine against Russia. I have referred to the piece in some of my writings:

Russia Is Winning The Industrial Warfare Race - Moon of Alabama, Sep 14 2023

A warning that Russia will outproduce the West was given back in June 2022 when Alex Vershinin of RUSI issued a note about The Return of Industrial Warfare:

The winner in a prolonged war between two near-peer powers is still based on which side has the strongest industrial base. A country must either have the manufacturing capacity to build massive quantities of ammunition or have other manufacturing industries that can be rapidly converted to ammunition production. Unfortunately, the West no longer seems to have either.

It has become too expensive for the West to regain that capability.

That Russia was running out of stuff was always wishful thinking, not fact based analysis. On that point it took the media more than a year to catch up with reality. On other aspects of the the war, casualty numbers come to mind, the media are still miles behind.

In another RUSI piece published in March 2024 Vershinin repeated his warning. I referred to it in May 2024:

When it came out in March I had read and linked to the latest Alex Vershinin piece at RUSI:
The Attritional Art of War: Lessons from the Russian War on Ukraine - RUSI
The attritional character of the war was obvious since Putin ordered the de-militarization of Ukraine. It is finally getting some discussion.

Vershinin is thus right in that the war in Ukraine is a war of attrition. But it is a one-sided one. It is only NATO and its proxy force Ukraine which get attrited while the Russian military gains in quality and quantity.

Still, it's a must read:

The fastest way to lose a war of attrition is to focus on manoeuvre, expending valuable resources on near-term territorial objectives.

This is exactly what Ukraine has done so far (Bakhmut, Krinky).
...
The 'west' (i.e. the U.S.) has lost its mind on the issue:

If the West is serious about a possible great power conflict, it needs to take a hard look at its industrial capacity, mobilisation doctrine and means of waging a protracted war, rather than conducting wargames covering a single month of conflict and hoping that the war will end afterwards.

Shortly after that writing the Ukrainian army launched its disastrous incursion into Russia's Kursk region. It was, after Bakhmut and Krinki, the third large operation which wasted Ukrainian lives and resources on a large scale for temporary propaganda gains.

A months ago Vershinin came out with a third piece that covers the issue. RUSI refrained, for whatever reason, from publishing it. It first appeared in Russia Matters under the title:

Battlefield Conditions Impacting Ukraine Peace Negotiations - Russia Matters, Apr 18 2025

It received little response. It was later republished under a different headline by Responsible Statecraft where I finally noticed it:

Ukraine’s battlefield position is deteriorating fast - Responsible Statecraft, May 5 2025
Should Kyiv collapse, the Russian army will surge forward, pushing the line of contact deeper into Ukraine and peace terms will get worse

Vershinin starts by pointing out the geopolitical importance for the West of wining (or losing) the war:

Cont. reading: An Immediate Peace Is The Best One Ukraine Can Ever Get

Posted by b at 15:45 UTC | Comments (501)