The Eurasia War - Wizard's Chess

 "We have nowhere left to retreat" - Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation. These words were meant for the Russian people, and not as a plea to the rest of the world. Putin is invoking the patriotic spirit of Russians, and framing the coming war as an act of self-defence (which it might be) so that he has those same people behind him for the big move. The move he has dreamed of since he witnessed the fall of the Soviet Union. This is not just about Donetsk or Lugansk Republics, or even Ukraine. This is about recreating the Russia of old. 

Putin has named several factors as strategic imperatives for Russia. A key one is having NATO nations on his borders. He points to Ukraine as a possible NATO member, but there are three countries on his eastern flank, within hours of Moscow, that are NATO members already: Estonia (population 1.3 million); Latvia (population 1.9 million); and Lithuania (population 2.7 million). Collectively known as the Baltic States, they give NATO a staging ground in behind Russia's western border, and are therefore problematic for Moscow. Those countries have, respectively, the following NATO troops stationed in them: 800; 1200; and 1200. Currently they represent an irritant at most, but their potential to become much more for NATO is the danger for Russia.

Most analysts are looking at Russia's position as solely focused on Ukraine, but this would be a foolish miscalculation. Firstly, Russia needs to send a very strong message to countries like Finland, Sweden, Georgia and others that it is prepared to destroy countries that imperil its strategic stability. A minor shuffle into eastern Ukraine would have no such affect, and might in fact do the opposite. Russia knows, like anyone knows, that if there is going to be a big cost then you might as well go for the gusto. The "gusto" in this case is not just eastern Ukraine, not just Ukraine, but the Baltic states and likely Moldova - or at least parts of it. The following map shows that such a move gives Russia the smallest western border to defend amongst all the options. (blue line)

Essentially the new western border of Russia will extend from Kaliningrad in the north to the Pro-Russian Transnistria in the south. It will reduce the number of countries accessing the Black Sea to Russia, Turkey, Romania and Hungary. Romania and Hungary are NATO countries, but now they will have Russian divisions stationed at their border, and they do remember when they were occupied, so their inclination to poke the bear will likely be zero. That leaves Turkey, also a NATO member, but a member whose western based economy is in freefall and whose currency is devaluating on a daily basis - leaving it vulnerable to China and Russia. 

Russia has also been moving large forces from the far east, near China, to their western border. Those troops have not yet arrived. This indicates that Russia intends on taking very serious military action, decisive military action, and it also indicates Russia is very comfortable leaving China with a less guarded border. 

That brings us to Eurasia. Russia and China have been planning a separate economic system from the West for decades. They have been stockpiling gold as their system will be a gold-backed trade/currency system. They have signed strategic economic and arms agreements. They are in a sense creating anew world order that intends to completely sideline the West economically, and if necessary militarily. The United States has fed this ambition by sanctioning Russia to the point where Russia, and importantly its citizens, have gotten used to being apart from Western goods and services. It is, therefore, almost amusing that the United States is threating Russia with expulsion from the SWIFT economic settlement system. Intentionally, or unintentionally, the US is playing right into Russia hands, and therefore China's. The West's reaction to a Russian invasion of the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Moldova will be the moment both China and Russia have been waiting for to initiate their Eurasian project, and they can say they had no choice, because the US threw them out of SWIFT. Things to come.

In the mean time look for a one fell swoop Russian assault, due to an Ukrainian assault in the Donbass, likely during the Beijing Olympics. Ukraine has been banging the pot internationally that Russia has 100,000 troops near its border, but what Ukraine has been reticent to say is that half the Ukrainian military is now on the the borders of the Donbass region. The danger for Ukraine is that half its army is in very real danger of being enveloped by Russian forces almost as soon as hostilities start. The following map shows the general area that one half of Ukraine's troops are concentrated in (blue circle), and the likely approaches of Russian, and possibly Belorussian troops. It's quite easy to see how quickly they will be isolated, or as the Russians like to call it: "a caldron". A second flanking will be to isolate Kiev from the West and place the entire country in a free fall within days of an invasion. 

 It should not be forgotten that Russia stated, just months ago, that a Ukrainian military intervention in the Donbass would be the end of Ukraine as a state.

We should find out if this is the big Eurasian move or not within the next month or so, but all signs point to it. Keep in mind that both China, Russia, and even North Korea are ahead of the West in developing strategically decisive hyper-sonic missiles. Russia and China have also now had the time to modernize their militaries. In a sense they are ready to go, and their hypersonic advantage may be short lived. It will be in that calculus that the fate of the world as we know it will rest. 

  

Omar Khadr's Settlement

The case of Omar Khadr has created a lot of upset in certain circles in Canada. As a teenager, Khadr was spirited off to Afghanistan, by his father, to take up the fight against the US military in that country. Clearly brain washed, Khadr was a 15 year old left by his father to fight a grown man's war. During a fire fight with American troops he stands accused (and convicted in the US) of throwing a grenade that killed a US combat medic. He was captured barely alive and, after having sustained severe wounds, including the loss of an eye, was spirited off to an the Bagram Air base. Here he was treated for his wounds, extensively interrogated, and then extradited to the infamous Gitmo prison in Cuba. That's the gist of the story that most Canadians associate with him.

That back story is not the reason Khadr just received $10.5 million dollars from the Canadian government, along with an official apology. It has absolutely nothing to do with it at all. The reason Khadr was compensated so lavishly in an arbitration settlement by the Canadian government was not to "reward a terrorist", as some politicians and self-interested groups are putting it. Far from it. The reason he received what he got was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that the Canadian government had violated his Charter rights by using agents of CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Agency) to interrogate him in Cuba, who then passed that information to their US counterparts, which resulted in him remaining in a situation that not only violated the Geneva Convention, but also the Charter. The reason it violated the Charter was the participation of the Canadian government, against its own citizen, in a process that involved torture and suspension of any and all human rights.

This is from the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in 2010:


 "Canada actively participated in a process contrary to its international obligations and
contributed to K's ongoing detention as to deprive him of his right to liberty and security of the
person, guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter, not in accordance with the principles of     fundamental justice.... The Charter applies to the participation of the Canadian officials in a regime later found to be in violation of fundamental rights protected by international law....There is a sufficient connection between the government's participation in the illegal process and the deprivation of K's liberties and security of the person.

The interrogation of a youth without access to counsel, to elicit statements about serious criminal charges while knowing that the youth had been subjected to sleep deprivation and while knowing that the fruits of the interrogation would be shared with the prosecutors, offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth."

 I found it insightful, given the Supreme Court of Canada's finding in favour of Khadr, to view Khadr's submissions to the Court, which included a very disturbing excerpt from an interview conducted with him by CSIS agents. I place this in here to give the story some balance, and because it sheds a light on why the Supreme Court made the decision it did.

CSIS:  You look tired. Okay, so I brought you a burger. It’s very hot though. What’s
 happening?
OMAR:  [indiscernible]
CSIS:  Pardon me?
OMAR:  … something that’s very important, but I’m afraid to say it.
CSIS:  Okay, take your time and could you do me a favour today while we’re talking? Just
 make sure you talk nice and loud, so I can keep that air conditioning on so we’re cool.
OMAR:  There’s something that I’m scared to say.
DFAIT:  You don’t have to be scared of anything from us.
CSIS:  What are you scared to say?
OMAR:  Promise me you’re going to protect me.
CSIS:   Why don’t you just tell us what it is you have to say?
OMAR:  Promise me you are going to protect me from the Americans.
CSIS:  From the Americans?
OMAR:  Yes.
CSIS:  Okay, what’s going on with the Americans?
OMAR:  Promise me that you are going to protect me if I tell you.
CSIS:  Well we can’t protect you if we don’t know what it is that you have to say directly.
OMAR:  Promise me you’re going to protect me if I tell you.
CSIS:  Well, the only thing I’ll promise is that I’ll listen to you, and I’ll talk to the
 Americans for you here.
OMAR:  And after you go?
CSIS:  Pardon me?
OMAR:  And after you go?
CSIS:  And after I go, then I’ll listen to what you know, then I’ll come back and talk to you
 again. Make sure everything’s alright. Tell me what’s changed from yesterday.
OMAR:   I’m scared to tell you.
CSIS:   Well, I’ll tell you, there’s not much we can do, unless I know what you’re talking
 about.
OMAR:  Everything that I said to the Americans was not right, I just said that because they
 tortured me very badly in Bagram. So I had to say what I said.

The conversation shows, quite clearly, a terrified youth. It is important to remember that.

Now the Conservative Party, and some veterans among others, have spoken out publicly against any financial settlement with Khadr - this group also includes former Prime Minister Harper. Ironically, the Supreme Court found that it was the deliberate actions of the Harper government that led directly, and profoundly to the violation of Khadr's Charter rights. It was the political decision of the then Prime Minister to align himself completely and without hesitation to the American invasion of Afghanistan and other US military foreign interventions. The attitude that prevailed was that when it came to "terrorism" there were no boundaries restraining the western powers and how they responded. The Khadr story is simply a footnote of that policy. Essentially, the Harper government's policy was the end justified the means. That was the US policy as well, which resulted in torture being used against prisoners.

Bottom line is this, the ends do not justify the means. The Charter of Rights enshrines that very view. Our governments in Canada, federal and provincial, have their hands tied by the Charter so as not to violate the freedoms and rights we as Canadians take for granted. Those rights and freedoms are so much a part of who we are as a people that any violation of them is really a violation of us - or that is how it should be treated. Unfortunately, during the ongoing wars in the Middle East, Canadians have become numb in many cases, and fail to respect that people from the areas of war are just that - people. A really good example of this was the recent "celebration" of a Canadian soldier's sniper shot that killed an insurgent in Afghanistan. I was left with the very disturbing impression that Canadians viewed this "achievement" in the same way one might view the killing of an animal in a hunt. It is a reoccurring theme that has somehow permeated our core beliefs since the start of all these Middle Eastern wars - that people from this area are somehow "inhuman" and not viewed with the same humanness as say the soccer mom down the street. The Harper government's treatment fit that billing, and the Supreme Court of Canada saw it in that light.

As Canadians we've been here before. It wasn't that long ago that all people of Japanese ancestry were herded into concentration camps for the duration of the Second world War - in Canada. It wasn't that long ago that Aboriginal people were herded into residential schools - in Canada. We are not as Lilly white and pure as we like to see ourselves. We have a history of sacrificing other peoples rights to suit our own agendas - as ugly and disturbing as that is to admit. Omar Khadr is just the latest case of the ends justify the means. The latest victim. Luckily for Khadr we now have the Charter, which we did not back in the aforementioned cases, and he had recourse. He used that recourse. The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with him, and wholly condemned the federal government's actions.

Mr. Harper, and the rest of the people who believe the end justifies the means, and justice is allocated based on the colour of your skin, have been served a message by the highest court - the days of the ends justify the means are over. Nothing can be more serious for a citizen, other than death, than to have their dignity stripped from them by a government that violates the very code meant to protect them from such actions. It is the social contact of all humans across the planet - we agree to be governed by you within these limits. It's often referred to as a constitution. The federal government violated Khadr's and it paid the price for it. Not enough Canadians stood up against their government to stop it from happening, and so we will all pay that bill. No matter who you think you are, or what you think of another, you are only ever their equal, and the Charter ensures it stays that way. Thank God.    

Why Russia should Invade Ukraine

It's a big leap for a writer in the West to advocate Russian military action in the Ukrainian republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. A stretch for sure. But, there is a sound case for it.

First is the nature of the warfare being conducted in the two republics. It started as a low level, small unit-type internal insurrection. However, after the Ukraine army was unable to take Slavyansk with this type of action, it switched to larger and larger caliber weapons - including aircraft and helicopter gunships. To make a long story short, the Ukraine army drove the separatist forces almost to the Russian border before they were defeated and forced to retreat to the approximate lines that they occupy today.

The problem with the Ukraine war is that it is essentially World War II type warfare without the air power. That essentially makes it like World War I warfare. A battle of attrition. Massive artillery replacing air power. Massive destruction and civilian casualties. Long bloody battles for meters that often get overturned by pointless counter attacks. No decisive battles or maneuvering. Just one layer of defence after another eating men and machines. A gristly affair that has no end other than internal political revolt or foreign intervention. It's the latter I suggest is necessary

Someone has to intervene militarily in this conflict to tear apart the two sides who have a blood lust for each other. Pure hatred that cannot be cured, and that must be dealt with by equally deadly force. Given that the conflict is happening on the border with Russia it is only logical that Russia should be the force to intervene.

One approach would be for Russia to declare a "hostilities free zone" in the republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. To back that declaration, Russia should position a large enough force to be militarily convincing on its border. Then, as a second step, Russia should impose air superiority over the area, engaging any artillery, from either side, that violates the hostilities free zone. Then, as the third step, Russia should move its ground forces into the two republics. Ukraine military units would be required to vacate the two republics. If they refused they would be engaged and neutralized. Separatist forces would be required to marshal their men and equipment at certain points within the republics. If they refused, a similar fate would await them as Ukrainian units that failed to comply.

Once the forces are separated, and order is restored, the international community would hold a referendum in the two republics to determine if they wish to remain in Ukraine or become their own country, or a part of Russia, or any combination thereof.


It's called peace-making, not peace-keeping. There is no other country better positioned to do it than Russia. There is no country with a greater interest, other than Ukraine itself, in the restoration of peace and order in Donetsk and Lugansk. Additionally, as a responsible member of the international community, it is Russia's responsibility to bring an end to the war crimes being conducted by both sides, although more so by Ukraine forces, in Donetsk and Lugansk. Russia doesn't need anyone's permission to do this. Fact is, if it tried to get that permission it wouldn't be granted, and the bloody conflict will continue to consume tens of thousands of lives. It's real politik for a real situation. The West should butt out, and in effect mind its own business. The current situation comes as a direct result of the West interfering in Ukraine affairs to begin with. If you believe that the overthrow of the previous Ukraine president was just a spontaneous combustion of patriotic fervor, well, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Simply isn't true.

It's time to stop the insanity in Ukraine by peace-making. The geo-politics means the cleanup job is Russia's responsibility. Hopefully, that will mean less civilians, especially the children, will die in a modern day "Mad Max" war in Ukraine.

Russia's Battle Plan

As the last 3 weeks have ground on it has become clear that Russia's primary objective in Ukraine is two-fold: Firstly it is to over throw the over throwers in Ukraine; ans secondly it is territorial. For the last three weeks the Russians have applied a "Chinese water torture" type of strategy. They could have occupied Crimea and captured or destroyed the Ukrainian ships and garrisons there within a day if they wanted to. Instead they slowly enveloped the bases, blockaded the ships, and reinforced - at a snail's pace. What does that do? It prolongs the suffering. Instead of a quick execution, the Russians are in effect torturing Ukraine. They are destabilizing the country and at the same time paralyzing the West.

The point of this post is how what will be the territorial objectives of Russia in Ukraine and how will they execute. There has been a great amount of spin from both sides about Ukraine's unity. One side says there is total unity, and the other says the country is divided along linguistic lines. Below are some maps that give you an idea how Ukraine breaks down geographically:

The 2004 election:

 

The 2006 election:

The 2007 election:

The trend is pretty clear, Ukraine is a country divided at least politically. Then consider the linguistic breakdown of Ukraine:

It's very clear that Ukrainians are divided politically by the language of origin. That goes along way in explaining why the first act of the new Ukrainian parliament was to remove Russian as an official language of Ukraine.

Not as important as territory, but still an important factor to the Russians, is the booty that an invasion of Ukraine can yield. Here is a look at the industrial assets of Ukraine:

Mines,oil, gas fields, and coal:

  

 You will note that the vast majority of Ukraine's developed natural resources are in the east and southeast of Ukraine.

Nuclear facilities:

You will note here that 75% of Ukraine's nuclear generation capabilities are located in the east and south east of Ukraine - while the disabled Chernobyl is just in the western boundary.

Then consider the military defence of Ukraine. Even its military commands are broken down in a similar fashion:

Bottom line - Ukraine is divided along linguistic, political, economic, and even military command lines.

The Ukrainian military forces are laid out:

Ukrainian military bases are laid out:

Ukrainian Air Defense bases are laid out:

Ukraine's highway system:

Although Ukraine's military is somewhat spread through the country, most of its strategic forces are located in the western portion of the country. This could better preserve them from immediate Russian attack in the east and southeast, but leaves the both very vulnerable to quick Russian occupation.

Strategically, militarily, economically and politically Ukraine is exposed to occupation and separation in its south and east. The question is whether Russia will decide to take these areas to support its goal of territorial buffer zones with the West. The logical conclusion, given Russia's military and political moves is yes. 

The first move was securing the Crimea. This takes care of a number of issues for Russia. Firstly, it allows Russia to transfer the S-300 and 400 air superiority missile systems into Crimea, bringing all of south east Ukraine into their range. That allows Russia to clear Ukrainian skies of any airborne threats - such as planes, helicopters, and missiles of all types. Russia achieves immediate air superiority. Taking the Crimea, and blockading the majority of Ukraine's fleet in port, clears the way for amphibious operations against areas like Odessa that would otherwise be compromised by a large naval presence. Finally, Crimea flanks eastern Ukraine, creates a second front, and gives the Russians a secure start line for a southern invasion. Therefore, I see Crimea as a necessary piece in the invasion puzzle, and not as a "crown jewel" that Russia has craved to own.

The second move has been positioning and battle drilling troops along Ukraine's eastern border. For a military that has not seen conflict of any serious scope for a generation, preparation is crucial to success. Military reports indicate that Russian airborne forces have been deployed in Crimea and along the eastern Ukraine border. The strength reported is divisional, and is likely the 7th Guards Airborne Division normally situate in the Moscow area. Also, light armored personal carriers (APC's) and tanks, designed for the airborne to be dropped with them, have been sighted on transport trains headed into the area, and on the roads - also headed to the eastern Ukraine border. This element is crucial. 

There are a number of bridges in south east Ukraine that would need to be secured prior to advancing armor and infantry arriving. If the Russians don't secure these, an advance could get bogged down behind rivers. Expect to see airborne drops east of Odessa all the way to just north of Crimea, and along the Dnipro River which separates eastern and western Ukraine. This will serve the dual purpose of securing bridges for advancing troops and trapping elements of the Ukrainian military placed in the east for defence.

Armor will be a big factor in this action, as will APCs. Ukraine has vast plains suited perfectly for fast tank warfare and fast moving mechanized infantry. The Russians have moved vast numbers of tanks and APC's to the eastern border. Look for the Russians to send armor columns to Kharkov, Donetsk,  Luhansk,  Zaporizhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Poltava, and possibly Kiev. 

The south east Ukraine will see more artillery, air, mechanized infantry, marine and airborne operations. The geography of the area, and the closeness to naval and air bases in Crimea, make these options ideal for the capture of Odessa and the south east.

The occupation of east and south east Ukraine will take less than a week. When it's over everything will have changed. Ukraine, on top of its already dire economic circumstance, will have lost a vast majority of its natural resources. Its electric power grid will be significantly diminished. It will be land locked and half the size it was. Its military will be either destroyed or captured. Its civilian population will be in a state of chaos, and the Russians will likely achieve their goal of removing this group from power. That could allow them to leave.

Or, they could stay. If the Russians stayed they would have created a land locked buffer zone between them and NATO. Significantly, they would surround what's left of Ukraine on three sides - making it permanently weak. In addition, they would completely control the Black Sea, and solidify themselves between Turkey and the rest of NATO. 

Economic sanctions are not a factor in this equation. Russia has the lowest debt ratio to GDP of any of the actors, and any of its moves will cause chaos in western economies beyond the scale Russia could be affected. It is not the oligarchs in Russia that decide if Putin stays or goes. It's the other way around. Banking on this would be wishful thinking. Whether Russia stays or goes in Ukraine depends on whether it wants to re-position strategically or whether it wants to alter the world economic order at this time. Personally, I lean to a Russian occupation of the east and south east, with some areas choosing to join Russia permanently. An occupation gives Russia so many tools to influence world events that it is almost irresistible to the chess playing bunch down at the Kremlin.