Quote:
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Belarus not only preserved, but also developed, the production of military equipment, electronics and communication systems. Belarusian arms and equipment are seriously represented on the international market, they can compete with Ukraine, which occupies second place in this area after Russia among the post-Soviet republics. Belarus ranks among the most developed of the former Soviet states, with a relatively modern - by Soviet standards - and diverse machine building sector and a robust agriculture sector. It also serves as a transport link for Russian oil exports to the Baltic states and Eastern and Western Europe. The breakup of the Soviet Union and its command economy has resulted in a sharp economic contraction as traditional trade ties have collapsed. At the same time, the Belarusian Government has lagged behind most other former Soviet states in economic reform; privatization has barely begun; the agriculture sector remains highly subsidized; the state retains control over many prices; and the system of state orders and distribution persists. Meanwhile, the national bank continues to pour credits into inefficient enterprises, fueling inflation and weakening incentives to improve performance. The government is pinning its hopes on reintegration with the Russian economy, but such a path would only partially restore traditional trade ties. Until economic reform is embraced, Belarus will continue in its economic morass.
The dependence of the Russian military-industrial complex on the Belarusian components has been preserved since Soviet times. Moscow has blocked access of Belarusian enterprises to the Russian defense order and tries to put under direct control the MIC of all CSTO member countries, including Belarus.
Russia planned to implement a program for the rearmament of the Russian army with the help of Belarusian profile enterprises. After a visit to Belarus in October 2012 by Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, responsible for the development of the MIC, Minsk and Moscow announced the intensification of cooperation in this area.
Moscow is interested in cooperation with specific enterprises that produce dual-purpose and special-purpose equipment and precision weapons. This Minsk plant of wheeled tractors, OJSC Integral, which produces microelectronic components, OJSC Peleng, which produces optical and mechanical and optoelectronic equipment, and a number of companies that manufacture components for guidance systems, liquid crystal monitors, navigation systems and components for military equipment.
The Russians, and the Soviets before them, don't do air doctrine the way NATO, and especially the U.S., does. There was an excellent article on War on the Rocks on this several months back (that I'm too lazy to go look for right now).UTExan said:ABATTBQ11 said:
For all of their bluster, Russia seems scared ****less of US weapons.
Our systems seem to exploit their weaknesses: highly precise artillery able to shoot and scoot vs. the Russian system, Javelin and the Saab NLAWS and their almost complete disregard for the tactical skill of their adversary. The biggest surprise has been the Russian inability to establish aerial dominance.
Quote:
His name is Carsten Linke and he was recently promoted to a top post in Germany's intelligence service, the B.N.D. The NY Times reports he was the "director of technical reconnaissance the unit responsible for cybersecurity and surveilling electronic communications." He was also a double-agent being paid cash to pass information to Russia. He was apparently asked for specific information on the location of US HIMARS launchers in Ukraine:But the question being asked in Germany now is how many more double agents are there.Quote:
Russia's FSB spy service asked Carsten Linke last autumn via a courier to pass on precise information on the positioning of the Himars and Iris-T rocket systems that had been supplied to Ukraine by the US and Germany, Der Spiegel reported on Friday.
German prosecutors are said to believe that it is unlikely that Mr Linke was able to pass on the information.
In return, the FSB likely paid the suspected German spy in cash. Investigators have found an envelope with a six figure sum in euros in a locker that belonged to him, the magazine reports.Quote:
As a Russian mole, he would have had access to critical information gathered since Moscow invaded Ukraine last year. He may have obtained high-level surveillance, not only from German spies, but also from Western partners, like the C.I.A…
Privately, three officials familiar with the investigation who requested anonymity in order to share details because discussing the inquiry publicly is illegal worry the case could be the tip of an ominous iceberg.
"Recruiting other spies is the top tier of espionage," one of the officials said. "And our technical reconnaissance unit is one of the most important departments of the B.N.D. To find someone relatively high up there? That makes this case explosive."
The case has already led to a second arrest that of a Russia-born accomplice, who acted as a courier, and, according to one official, brought some 400,000 euros in cash to Mr. Linke from Moscow for his information.
Quote:
Therein lies the problem. Outside opinions and even responses do not matter to the large majority of the population of the Russian Federation. At best, such are seen as bigotry and an attack. At worst, they were not even a consideration. That holds true for the leadership as well. For all intents and purposes, the people of the Russian Federation live in a bubble, and the upper leadership lives in an even more dense and impenetrable bubble.
Here's why: RuAFSmeghead4761 said:The Russians, and the Soviets before them, don't do air doctrine the way NATO, and especially the U.S., does. There was an excellent article on War on the Rocks on this several months back (that I'm too lazy to go look for right now).UTExan said:ABATTBQ11 said:
For all of their bluster, Russia seems scared ****less of US weapons.
Our systems seem to exploit their weaknesses: highly precise artillery able to shoot and scoot vs. the Russian system, Javelin and the Saab NLAWS and their almost complete disregard for the tactical skill of their adversary. The biggest surprise has been the Russian inability to establish aerial dominance.
Basically, the Russians use their air forces for 1) defense (interceptors like the Mig-25 and Mig -31) and as 2) flying artillery. The Ukrainians aren't launching deep strikes into Russia (largely because they lack the capability), so the defense part doesn't have anything to do. The Ukrainians have enough air defense systems, and are good enough at using them, to deny the Russians the ability to operate effectively over Ukrainian controlled territory, so not much, if any, flying artillery.
The Russians don't have much, if anything, in the way of the type of SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense) capabilities that the U.S. developed as a result of the Vietnam and Yom Kippur wars. If they had anything in this area when the war started, not much of it seems to be left at this point.
Smeghead4761 said:
Very interesting article, strategic level, from Laughing Wolf: https://www.laughingwolf.net/2023/02/17/peace-at-any-price/Quote:
Therein lies the problem. Outside opinions and even responses do not matter to the large majority of the population of the Russian Federation. At best, such are seen as bigotry and an attack. At worst, they were not even a consideration. That holds true for the leadership as well. For all intents and purposes, the people of the Russian Federation live in a bubble, and the upper leadership lives in an even more dense and impenetrable bubble.
BLUF: Russia isn't going to stop until they are beat down and unable to continue. And, IMHO, even if the Russians are economically, and possibly literally, starved into saying "Uncle," the best you're going to get is a Versailles type armistice, with the Russians working as hard as they can to subvert it and attack again in a generation or two.
For the Ukraine, this is, obviously, a war of national existence. The Russians, unfortunately, largely view it the same say, that Ukraine is part of the Russkiy Mir, rightfully belonging to Russia.
When both sides view a war as existential, the war won't end until one side is crushed beyond the ability to resist.
Even if Ukraine were to succeed in recapturing Crimea, Donbas, and driving the Russians totally back to the pre-2014 borders, the best they'll get is a cease fire, with Round II coming as soon as Russian feels like they have a chance to win.
#UPDATE: U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says U.K. will be first nation to provide Ukraine with long-range weapons - Speech at Munich Security Conference
— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) February 18, 2023
In Luhansk Oblast, Kreminna has been the most difficult axis lately. There have been no significant advances by the Russian occupation forces there, but the number of attacks and shelling has increased, regional governor Serhiy Hayday announced during the national telethon.
— Hromadske Int. (@Hromadske) February 18, 2023
MORE on the failure of Russia's air "campaign."74OA said:Here's why: RuAFSmeghead4761 said:The Russians, and the Soviets before them, don't do air doctrine the way NATO, and especially the U.S., does. There was an excellent article on War on the Rocks on this several months back (that I'm too lazy to go look for right now).UTExan said:ABATTBQ11 said:
For all of their bluster, Russia seems scared ****less of US weapons.
Our systems seem to exploit their weaknesses: highly precise artillery able to shoot and scoot vs. the Russian system, Javelin and the Saab NLAWS and their almost complete disregard for the tactical skill of their adversary. The biggest surprise has been the Russian inability to establish aerial dominance.
Basically, the Russians use their air forces for 1) defense (interceptors like the Mig-25 and Mig -31) and as 2) flying artillery. The Ukrainians aren't launching deep strikes into Russia (largely because they lack the capability), so the defense part doesn't have anything to do. The Ukrainians have enough air defense systems, and are good enough at using them, to deny the Russians the ability to operate effectively over Ukrainian controlled territory, so not much, if any, flying artillery.
The Russians don't have much, if anything, in the way of the type of SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense) capabilities that the U.S. developed as a result of the Vietnam and Yom Kippur wars. If they had anything in this area when the war started, not much of it seems to be left at this point.
74OA said:
Russian cyber-attacks peaked in '22, but without corresponding impact.
PHISHING
Waffledynamics said:#UPDATE: U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says U.K. will be first nation to provide Ukraine with long-range weapons - Speech at Munich Security Conference
— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) February 18, 2023
Waffledynamics said:#UPDATE: U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says U.K. will be first nation to provide Ukraine with long-range weapons - Speech at Munich Security Conference
— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) February 18, 2023
GAC06 said:Waffledynamics said:#UPDATE: U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says U.K. will be first nation to provide Ukraine with long-range weapons - Speech at Munich Security Conference
— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) February 18, 2023
I wonder what they have in mind. Storm shadow is an air launched cruise missile with 350 mile range. There's an export variant with 150 mile range. Not sure how easy that would be to integrate with Ukraine's former Soviet aircraft. UK also has tomahawks but only sub launched I believe. Naval strike missile could fit the bill but I don't think the UK has them yet or ground launched capability.
I guess it must be storm shadow but if it's the reduced range export version it's not better than the ground launched small diameter bomb whenever we get those there.
I would think CrimeaAtlAg05 said:Waffledynamics said:#UPDATE: U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak says U.K. will be first nation to provide Ukraine with long-range weapons - Speech at Munich Security Conference
— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) February 18, 2023
What does that mean exactly? Are we talking targets still in Ukraine or are we talking long range into Russia?
Some news from the past few days. First, the Kupyansk area:
— Andrew Perpetua (@AndrewPerpetua) February 19, 2023
Russia has claimed to have capture Hryanykivka. The most reliable account I have is from a Russian officer in the area who claims they broke the first line of Ukrainian defense. pic.twitter.com/SqglVwCJu9
Quote:
Since the start of the war in Ukraine, the NATO nations have largely followed a "new weapon of the month club" approach. It often feels like leadership in Washington, London and elsewhere puts up a good face about having a strategic plan, then quickly capitulates when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy makes a full-court press to the public.
The result: a steady flow of land-based weapons going to Ukraine with no strings attached. And while there are good reasons to support Ukraine they are, without question, the victim in this war this situation is becoming untenable. Simply sending more armored vehicles to Ukraine without a clear calculus behind it will only mean pushing Ukrainian forces into a death trap of a war of attrition, with a country with 11 time zones and a historical willingness to throw as many bodies at a problem as possible.
It's time the NATO nations remember that if they are supplying the weapons, they should have a political say in what happens with Ukraine's future. And it's time for them to realize a path forward for ending the conflict. We need war termination, and we need airpower as a way to enhance Ukrainian capabilities and to inform the Russians that Ukraine will never be theirs.
Our proposal: the West should train Ukrainian pilots on modern aircraft and then provide them with enough jets and airborne ISR assets that they can control their own airspace. And in exchange, Zelenskyy should be told to accept a new boundary with Russia and call a truce.
There is some question as to whether/when Eurofighters/F-16's would really be of value to the Ukrainians. Realistically it sounds like that would take until at least October or so.Quote:
In other words, there is a short window to work the airpower dimension as part of shaping an American and perhaps Western strategy towards the war. If one combines the use of air defense systems with the provision of new combat aircraft and appropriate strike systems, the Ukrainians could craft a system of defensible airbases as well. This would be crucial to their future defense after the war, and crucial in terminating the war now.
The USAF is in the throes of reducing its inventory of combat air in the hopes of building up new capabilities. A Ukrainian Air Force could be built from this stockpile alone. Other NATO nations can clearly contribute, but the need is to have cohesive airpower for defense of the Ukrainian territory.
We should help create this reality only by positioning the West for war termination. We have to be clear and honest about what American objectives are in this conflict: they are not to support an endless war.
The current approach fuels a long ground war of attrition. Instead, let us force the Russians to face the reality of a Ukrainian air force, equipped from USAF and NATO air forces, to persuade them to negotiate a termination to the conflict and ensure the Ukrainians are equipped so that they are never invaded again.
Waffledynamics said:
Holy crapClose combat. Ukrainian soldiers repelling a Russian assault. pic.twitter.com/4RGxlvW59q
— Paul Jawin (@PaulJawin) February 17, 2023
My proposal: Firstly, give Ukraine enough armor and artillery for a credible Ukrainian counteroffensive to recapture their southern coast. Next, give Ukraine enough ATACMS and GLSDB to cut all supply routes from Russia into Ukraine ... including destroying the Kerch Bridge. In exchange, tell Zelenskyy that when they recapture their coast, we will provide them with F16's to control their airspace. All discussions about new borders will begin after Russia withdraws to their 2014 boundary and stops attacking Ukraine.Quote:
Our proposal: the West should train Ukrainian pilots on modern aircraft and then provide them with enough jets and airborne ISR assets that they can control their own airspace. And in exchange, Zelenskyy should be told to accept a new boundary with Russia and call a truce.
nortex97 said:NATO is comfortable pushing Russia to the brink because they believe Putin no longer has nuclear weapons according to former KGB spy. I guess I feel better for myself, but can’t help but feel for the Ukraine people spilling their blood for our proxy war against Russia. https://t.co/v9iM09ZtV2
— @amuse (@amuse) February 19, 2023
Well there's a new wild assertion.
Quote:
The Ukraine war will have cost the German economy around 160bn euros (142bn), or about 4% of its gross domestic output, in lost value creation by the end of the year, the head of the German Chambers of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) said.
That means GDP per capita in Europe's largest economy will be 2,000 lower than it would otherwise have been, DIHK chief Peter Adrian told the Rheinische Post, Reuters reports.
German industry is set to pay about 40% more for energy in 2023 than in 2021, before the crisis triggered by Russia's invasion of Ukraine on 24 February last year, a study by Allianz Trade said last month.
"The growth outlook for 2023 and 2024 is therefore also lower than in many other countries," Adrian said, adding that was also the case last year.
