Russia has invaded Ukraine

I think that’s a possible reason but not the most likely.

They have to bear in mind that *if* Trump wins in November, military aid from the US could abruptly stop early next year. If that happens and they have to agree a ceasefire with Russia, then their holding of Russian territory is likely to be the only possible way of them getting any of their territory, presently in Russian hands, back.

However, for that gambit to work, they would have to dig in and hold what they’ve taken for at least six months, and then present a plausible threat of holding it indefinitely. That’s a massive investment in resources they probably don’t have and can’t fake.

It is much more likely that their aims are more tactical. The more conscripts who surrender, the more mobiks Russia will have to redeploy from the Donbas. The longer Ukraine is present in Kursk, the more opportunities it has to damage strategic russian assets such as railway infrastructure and maybe, just maybe, a large nuclear power station. Also, the longer they are there, the more the Kremlin’s incompetence will be laid bare.

[Sirius]

This is my view on this, Ukraine will push as deep into Russia as they can then consolidate. They can then move there heavy artillery and missile systems in to that area. If this brings them in range of Moscow then Putin will have a major headache on his hands as it brings his war home for all to see. If rumours are true he tended not to force enlist people from Moscow well now they will see what the Ukrainians have been putting up with. BTW straight line of site from Kursk Oblast to Moscow is 360 miles

Yes, i think part of this is bringing things into range that weren’t previously - they have already destroyed a ton of ammunition, probably glide bombs, at airfields they couldnt previously reach. I’m not sure they’ll go for Moscow unless they think they can hit military targets reliably though. At present they have the moral high ground but if they start looking like they’re demolishing housing things will get awkward.

[1andrew1]

Offensive into Russia aimed at drawing Moscow into ‘fair talks’, says Ukraine

Comments by Zelenskiy aide come as Russia accuses western forces of involvement in Kursk incursion

Ukraine’s lightning offensive into several Russian border regions is designed to persuade Moscow to engage in “fair” talks about its war in Ukraine, an aide to Volodymyr Zelenskiy says.

The Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on the Telegram messaging app: “We need to inflict significant tactical defeats on Russia. In the Kursk region, we clearly see how the military tool is objectively used to convince the Russian Federation to enter into a fair negotiation process.”

Both sides were pushing ahead with their offensives on Friday, as Russian forces edged closer to the key city of Pokrovsk in Donetsk and Ukraine appeared to be consolidating its gains in Russia’s Kursk region.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ar...ffensive-talks

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yes, i think part of this is bringing things into range that weren’t previously - they have already destroyed a ton of ammunition, probably glide bombs, at airfields they couldnt previously reach. I’m not sure they’ll go for Moscow unless they think they can hit military targets reliably though. At present they have the moral high ground but if they start looking like they’re demolishing housing things will get awkward.

I doubt extending into Kusk region has anything to do with the damage they are doing to airfields and ammo dumps Chris. The development of more longer range drones certainly has. I doubt Moscow is on their list too.

I also ignore anything published by the Guardian.

[Pierre]

Not a news channel I’m familiar with, but if true, it’s comforting to see the EU continuing to support the a Russian war effort.

https://rmx.news/article/so-much-for...exports-to-eu/

Originally Posted by Pierre

Not a news channel I’m familiar with, but if true, it’s comforting to see the EU continuing to support the a Russian war effort.

https://rmx.news/article/so-much-for...exports-to-eu/

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

This chart shows the change in natural gas imports to the EU. It’s obvious even at a cursory glance that Russian gas supply has shrunk dramatically while the US, which was always a small supplier, is one of several that has increased a little to plug the gap, although the EU’s gas consumption overall has also fallen by quite a bit.

Q2 2024 has the lowest total consumption of any quarter since Q1 2021. Russian and American supply both shrank from Q1 to Q2, but American supply shrank by slightly more.

Notwithstanding Hungary, which is the real Russian Trojan horse within the EU, and given the level of dependency European countries previously had on Russian gas, the picture does not look bad at all.



Clickable chart: https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/euro...al-gas-imports

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Not a news channel I’m familiar with, but if true, it’s comforting to see the EU continuing to support the a Russian war effort.

https://rmx.news/article/so-much-for...exports-to-eu/

Why post pro-Russia propaganda from a site you're unfamiliar with, without checking its accuracy?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why post pro-Russia propaganda from a site you're unfamiliar with, without checking its accuracy?

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2...little-success

ReMixNews, a website featuring news and commentary from the V4 countries, published by Budapest-based FWD Affairs LLC. ReMixNews is "funded in part by the Batthany Lajos Foundation in Budapest," according to their website, with a typo in the spelling of the organisation.

Heavy with ads, ReMixNews boasts extensive coverage on migration, the “liberal elite” and “oligarch George Soros”, phases in line with the Hungarian government’s narrative.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why post pro-Russia propaganda from a site you're unfamiliar with, without checking its accuracy?

I like to look at a variance of news outlets.

There’s plenty of people post from BBC/Sky without checking their accuracy.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I like to look at a variance of news outlets.

There’s plenty of people post from BBC/Sky without checking their accuracy.

Ah, seeking out 'news' you like. You're guaranteed to find it somewhere these days.

Try the Halifax Courier instead. Local news for local people.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Ah, seeking out 'news' you like. You're guaranteed to find it somewhere these days.

Try the Halifax Courier instead. Local news for local people.

I didn’t “seek” it, it popped up in one of my Social Media feeds.

The Courier thought …….full of Russian misinformation…….almost as bad as the Telegraph and Argus

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I like to look at a variance of news outlets.

There’s plenty of people post from BBC/Sky without checking their accuracy.

That article is certainly at variance from the truth.

What inaccurate stories have people here posted from Sky or the BBC?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

That article is certainly at variance from the truth.

Is this

From April to June, the European Union bought more than 12.7 billion cubic meters from Russia and 12.3 billion cubic meters from the United States

Not accurate?

---------- Post added at 22:27 ---------- Previous post was at 22:19 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

This chart shows the change in natural gas imports to the EU. It’s obvious even at a cursory glance that Russian gas supply has shrunk dramatically while the US, which was always a small supplier, is one of several that has increased a little to plug the gap, although the EU’s gas consumption overall has also fallen by quite a bit.

Q2 2024 has the lowest total consumption of any quarter since Q1 2021. Russian and American supply both shrank from Q1 to Q2, but American supply shrank by slightly more.

Notwithstanding Hungary, which is the real Russian Trojan horse within the EU, and given the level of dependency European countries previously had on Russian gas, the picture does not look bad at all.



Clickable chart: https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/euro...al-gas-imports

I take your point……but why isn’t it zero?

The other sad fact is, that if Ukraine hadn’t blown up Nordstream, Germany would probably still be in the weird position of giving Ukraine tanks but still be buying Russian gas.

You can’t claim to “stand with Ukraine” and at the same time put money in Russian pockets.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Is this



Not accurate?

---------- Post added at 22:27 ---------- Previous post was at 22:19 ----------


I take your point……but why isn’t it zero?

The other sad fact is, that if Ukraine hadn’t blown up Nordstream, Germany would probably still be in the weird position of giving Ukraine tanks but still be buying Russian gas.

You can’t claim to “stand with Ukraine” and at the same time put money in Russian pockets.

Realpolitik - Hungary, for starters, really is a Trojan horse. Viktor Orban is a nasty piece of work who has been trying to stop sanctions and cash aid from the EU to Russia and has been leaned on pretty heavily by the other member states to go as far as he has. He isn’t about to stop using Russian gas and risk harming his own economy in a cause he opposes. Hungary’s deal with Russia gets them 4.5bn cubic metres of gas per year, which is the lion’s share of EU imports from Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/ene...on-2024-06-06/

There will be other critical requirements that have exemptions allowing Russian gas to be used where there are no alternatives. Some private companies are doubtless abusing that and not being as diligent as they could about where their supply comes from.

Re Nordstream, the qui bono question is an interesting one - Ukraine is a knee-jerk response but it would have been enormously risky for them to damage German interests so spectacularly. Russia on the other hand was already using restricted supply (under the guise of ‘maintenance’) to signal a warning to Germany but as a result was having to pay Germany fines for breach of contract. A further clause exempts them from paying penalties for non-supply in the event of critical damage outside of their control. As things stand, they’re not supplying gas and not having to pay for not supplying it.

If it was Ukraine, though, good on them. Germany’s early response to all this was spineless in the extreme, and having put their head in a lion’s mouth by signing up to Nordstream 2 while everyone else was warning them not to was stupid. I wish there was a word for the sense of satisfaction you get from watching it all unravel.