|
The Buildup To War In Ukraine – Wednesday, February 16, 2022
On the even of February 15 the Russian Foreign Ministry released information about a phone call between Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. CGTN reported on February 16:
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday called on the U.S. to drop aggressive rhetoric in dialogue on security guarantees and demonstrate pragmatic approach to this topic, state-owned Tass news agency reports.
Lavrov held a telephone conversation with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in which the Russian diplomat stressed the need to continue working together.
"On our part, it was stressed that it is necessary to continue joint work, as was agreed by Presidents [of Russia Vladimir] Putin and [of the United States Joe] Biden during their telephone call on February 12, in the context of the US and NATO proposals on security guarantees," TASS quotes the Russian foreign ministry.
"Lavrov specially stressed the inadmissibility of aggressive rhetoric fanned by Washington and its closest allies and called for a pragmatic dialogue on the entire spectrum of issues raised by Russia, with a focus on the principle of indivisible security."
Russia had previously sent demands for talks on several issues to the U.S. and NATO. The most important point for Russia had been the term 'indivisible security' in the sense that security for one side should not interfere with the security of the other side.
This term is included in several treaties with Russia. It claimed that the expansion of NATO was threatening its security and thereby breaching those treaties. While the U.S. denied this, it is obvious that all NATO expansion were increasing the potential danger for Russia. Russia and NATO were thus put into a classic security dilemma:
In international relations, the security dilemma (also referred to as the spiral model) is when the increase in one state's security (such as increasing its military strength) leads other states to fear for their own security (because they do not know if the security-increasing state intends to use its growing military for offensive purposes). Consequently, security-increasing measures can lead to tensions, escalation or conflict with one or more other parties, producing an outcome which no party truly desires; a political instance of the prisoner's dilemma.
The U.S. had responded to the Russian paper by conceding on some minor points that Russia had long demanded but not on any of the big questions of which the most important one was 'indivisible security'.
On February 2 2022 I had described the process in detail:
[I]n mid December Russia started to counter the U.S. move. It published two draft treaties, one with the U.S. and one with NATO, that included stringent security demands:
- No more NATO expansion towards Russia's borders.
- Retraction of the 2008 NATO invitation to Ukraine and Georgia.
- Removal of foreign NATO forces from east Europe.
- Legally binding guarantee that no strike systems which could target Moscow will be deployed in countries near to Russia.
- No NATO or equivalent (UK, U.S., Pl.) 'exercises' near Russian borders.
- NATO ships, planes to keep certain distances from Russian borders.
- Regular military-to-military talks.
- No U.S. nukes in Europe.
Russia requested written responses and threatened to take 'military technical' measures should the responses be negative. Russia also planned for and launched new military exercises.
The responses were received but, following a U.S. request, Russia refrained from publishing them. They were leaked to El Pais, published today and can be downloaded here (pdf).
The U.S. response to Russia's draft treaties is professional. While it rejects Russia's main demands, especially a neutral status for the Ukraine, it concedes on minor issues and offers additional talks on them. The NATO response is in contrast highly ideological and rejects all of Russia's points while making new demands towards Russia which are designed to be rejected. (Future negotiations are now likely to exclude NATO.)
Russia has yet to officially respond to the received letters. During a news conference after talks with the Prime Minister of Hungary the Russian President remarked on the letters:
[W]hile ignoring our concerns, the United States and NATO are referring to the right of states to freely choose specific methods to ensure their security. But this is not only about providing someone with the right to freely choose methods to ensure their security. This is only one part of the well-known indivisible security formula. The second inalienable part implies that it is impossible to strengthen anyone’s security at the expense of other states’ security.
Russia's Foreign Ministry has send a letter to several NATO countries in which it requests their official opinions on several agreements they have signed which include clauses on the indivisibility of security:
The very essence of the agreements on indivisible security is that either there is security for all or there is no security for anyone.
How is the signing of those treaties and indivisible security for all compatible with the aggressive NATO expansion aimed at Russia? 'Western' foreign ministries will find it difficult to answer that question.
France 24 listed some of its relevant headlines of the day:
- Ukraine crisis: Moscow announces end of Crimea drills, NATO unconvinced
- Russia's parliament asks Putin to recognise breakaway east Ukrainian regions
- Ukraine crisis: Russian pullout meets Western allies scepticism
- 'Day of Unity': Ukrainians raise flags to defy Russia invasion fear
- NATO says Russia appears to be continuing military escalation in Ukraine
- NATO chief says Russia appears to be continuing military build-up around Ukraine
The OSCE Special Observer Mission at the ceasefire line in southeast-Ukraine reported of February 16 that the number of ceasefire violations had suddenly jumped to above average. Artillery exchanges took place on many parts of the front.
In Donetsk region, the SMM recorded 189 ceasefire violations, including 128 explosions. In the previous reporting period, it recorded 24 ceasefire violations in the region.
In Luhansk region, the Mission recorded 402 ceasefire violations, including 188 explosions. In the previous reporting period, it recorded 129 ceasefire violations in the region.
On February 16 the observers noticed several self propelled howitzer (2S1 Govzdika, 122 mm) in violation of withdrawal lines. Four were seen on the Ukrainian government side and two on the non-government side.
After three days that had been more or less quite the sudden jump in fighting was particularly noticeable.
bigger
The map shows explosions, the small black dots, on both sides of the ceasefire line.
bigger
Posted by: Zebra | Feb 16 2023 18:14 utc | 13
Excellent article. Here’s the most important issues, IMHO.
An example is this: up to now, Russia’s airpower has been characterized by many as ‘anemic’, which most don’t realize was due to the small number of forces Russia has actually committed to the conflict thus far. This has reciprocal effects on the function of the entirety of the frontline forces in a given theater. Think of a battle as a sort of eco-system—you’ve seen the famous videos where wolves are introduced into a wildlife preserve, causing a chain reaction of events; whereby the wolf eats the deer which eat the grass, which saps the water from the stream, stifling the breeding of fish. So by introducing a wolf, a miraculous, compounded and seemingly paradoxical chain of events occur, eventually leading to the revitalization of the river and fish habitat.
Russia’s coming escalation includes an increase in troop numbers of all branches, including the airforce. We’ve seen the reports how 400 jets and 300 helicopters are now allegedly stationed outside Ukraine, ready for action.
Similarly, by the force of scale—by increasing the air support to a given frontline, Russia will precipitate a chain reaction in the eco-system. There’ll be more ‘wild weasels’ for SEAD missions, AFU AD systems will be consequently far more pressured and less active, which in turn will compound the active participation of even MORE airpower, in the manner of frontline bombers and attack choppers—now able to more freely operate. This domino effect will cause an increase in the effectiveness of assault units advancing at the enemy, which will keep them from being “static” and stuck in stalemate-y, positional and attritional battles—which will therefore negate a lot of NATO ISR reliant on static targets whose coordinates they can feed to artillery systems. In short, it will avalanche into a more fluid battlefield which hampers and strains ISR systems, particularly satellite recon.
Similarly, the ‘economy of scale’ concept pertains to the increase of Russian AD systems in each sector. As discussed briefly in Part 2, a more ‘densely’ integrated and layered AD system can have compounding effects due to how all the various disparate parts mutually overlay each other like neurons making multiplicative connections to each other.
This will further compound Russia’s ability to intercept strikes at the ‘rear lines’, which is precisely what the biggest (and only) strength of NATO’s ISR capabilities has been. One must understand, due to Russia’s very lean use of force to now, it meant the drastic under-powering and under-utilization of AD systems. But with the coming troop increase, many more missile brigades will be brought in, and will have an additive effect, like standing waves or cymatics systems, where overlapping frequencies become much stronger together.
Many people sat goggly-eyed months ago, watching the perplexing display of the Antonovsky bridge being hammered by HIMARs, often without even the barest Russian effort to intercept the missiles. Most don’t realize that Russia’s small force usage was the culprit. Stretched so thin, even the missile brigades operated anemically, such that hardly a single Pantsir unit could be found to cover the bridge, at least up until the end, when more were moved in.
Also, there’s the fact that while Russia has a lot of shorter ranged barrels than M-777, it also has a lot of longer ranged barrels. The US “long range” Himars rockets are very specialized and limited in numbers, meanwhile they can be utilized on immediate front but go to waste. 1 to 1 the Tornado is at least par or above par to Himars. Russia can continue waging the more successful counter-artillery war with benefit of significantly greater range for barrels, which nullifies potential US advantage of C4ISR.
Posted by: unimperator | Feb 16 2023 20:00 utc | 38
Here, once again, correct or not is a full translation:
~~
MOSCOW, Feb 16 — RIA Novosti. The NATO exercise Baltops-2022, which took place last summer near the Danish island of Bornholm, involved American divers with deep-sea equipment, according to an anonymous letter received by American journalist John Dugan.
He provided the text of the letter to RIA Novosti. According to Dugan, he has every reason to trust the anonymous source, as he presented evidence – photos from the exercises and documents. But he asked not to distribute them, fearing the disclosure of his identity. The email was sent from a disposable email inbox on October 2. Dugan tried to contact the author, but was unsuccessful.
American flag on the building of the US Department of Defense – RIA Novosti, 1920, 16.02.2023
11:02
The United States is trying to wind down the investigation on Nord Streams, the expert believes
“I fully trust the letter. It contains details that only a person familiar with the Baltops 2022 exercises and deep-sea equipment could provide. Everything was correct,” the journalist told RIA Novosti.
The author of the letter claims that in June last year he participated in the Baltops exercises. According to him, on June 15, a helicopter delivered a group of Americans in civilian clothes.
“My first thought: they looked like a group of terrorists,” the letter says.
The author explains that his hairstyles, mustaches and beards seemed strange to him, as well as the lack of personal tokens.
Divers were met by the Vice Admiral of the Sixth Fleet U.S. Navy and a group of people in plain clothes. The author of the letter did not hear their conversation because of the noise of the helicopter.
The divers themselves said that they would participate in demining exercises: they had to swim out on a rubber boat to a certain area, find and neutralize anti-ship mines. However, they did not have the equipment for this. And after a conversation with the vice admiral, the author of the letter claims, they did not go to the area of the exercises and were absent for quite a long time.
“They left the boat in their rebreathers and disappeared underwater for more than six hours. There is no such autonomous equipment that will allow a diver to stay underwater for six hours. With the latest military systems, it’s three or four hours maximum,” the letter said. According to the author, the US military returned without boxes, then they were picked up by a helicopter.
At a briefing before the start of Baltops-2022, the commander of the Sixth Fleet, Vice Admiral Eugene Black, said that the exercise program includes the development of underwater mining. But since the author of the letter could not be contacted, Dugan could not confirm the identity of the vice admiral referred to in the letter.
Last week, American journalist, Winner of the Pulitzer Prize Seymour Hersh published an article on the investigation of the accident on Russian export gas pipelines laid along the bottom of the Baltic Sea. According to his version, American divers planted explosives under Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 during Baltops-2022, and three months later the Norwegians put it into action. And President Joe Biden decided to sabotage after more than nine months of secret discussions with the national security team, the journalist claims. In his opinion, the reason was Biden’s fears due to the fact that Germany, which receives gas from Russia through Nord Streams, will not want to participate in military assistance to Ukraine.
In Washington, these accusations are categorically refuted.
Attacks Russian export pipelines occurred on September 26 – then a gas leak was found in four places at once. Sweden, Denmark and Germany are conducting investigations, but they have not yet led to any concrete results. The Kremlin called the accident an act of international terrorism.
Posted by: Buffalo_Ken | Feb 16 2023 20:57 utc | 58
|
